One could avoid either term. Even though both terms include the word "constitutional," neither term appears in the Constitution, and I cannot imagine how a real case could hinge on the perception that we are in a "constitutional crisis" or a "constitutional moment."
But I'm thinking about these 2 terms together because I just listened to today's NYT "Daily" podcast: "A Constitutional Crisis." The phrase was used 23 times, as if we could be convinced by repetition. But convinced of what?Michael Barbaro: The phrase du jour, Adam, right now, in Washington, is "Constitutional Crisis." And we come to you as our resident scholar of the law and the courts to understand what A Constitutional Crisis actually is and how you know when you are in the middle of one....
Adam Liptak: I've been talking to a lot of law professors and what emerges from those conversations is that there's no fixed, agreed-upon definition of A Constitutional Crisis. It has characteristics, notably, when one of the three branches tries to get out of its lane, asserts too much power. It often involves a president flouting statutes, flouting the constitution, flouting judicial orders. And it can be a single instance, but it's more typically cumulative. But it's not a binary thing, it's not a switch.
Liptak's been "talking to a lot of law professors," but apparently not to Alan Dershowitz. I highly recommend his "Trump versus the courts: who will win? My legal analysis" (from February 10th):
Alan Dershowitz: I want to be very clear the New York Times had a front page story major story.... All the law professors in the world the entire academy, all the law professors think there's a horrible constitutional crisis going on. Of course, they interviewed 3 or 4 left-wing anti-Trump law professors. They didn't introduce anybody who would have a neutral view of the Constitution, and they didn't give their readers an honest assessment of the issue. There is no constitutional crisis! Take it from me! I've been study studying the Constitution for close to 70 years now. I know a thing about the Constitution. The United States has a system of checks and balances. That system is designed to prevent constitutional crisis. The Democrats are crying wolf. Schumer screaming out there like a like a mad person about about the Constitutional crisis. People talking about going to the streets and war. No no no no.....
The NYT article he was talking about, published February 10th, was written by Adam Liptak — "Trump’s Actions Have Created a Constitutional Crisis, Scholars Say."
Scholars say? Were they just "3 or 4 left-wing anti-Trump law professors" as Dershowitz asserts? The left-wing anti-Trumpers are out of power and need some line of attack, and in typical fashion, they push us to panic. But why isn't this normal litigation over the meaning of provisions of law and how that applies to real cases, filed in court, that need — and will get — deep analysis and measured deliberation? Why the freakout? And what will you do if the America people stand back and cynically contemplate your freakout and form the opinion that you're panicking because you and your friends have something to hide and what they want is to see what Elon Musk is threatening to reveal?
Now, I got to thinking about this other term — "constitutional moment" — that I think lawprofs whip out when there's something disruptive going on and they like it. I wondered if anyone was deploying this term, and I found a NYT column — also published on February 10th — "Welcome to America’s Fourth Great Constitutional Rupture" by Noah Millman (NYT)(free-access link):
As the legal scholar Bruce Ackerman delineated in his classic trilogy on popular constitutionalism, “We the People,” previous moments of radical transformation often violated the rules that governed normal politics....
The first such moment was the founding itself....
Union victory [in the Civil War] led to a second constitutional moment with the Reconstruction amendments, which could be passed only because the former rebel states were under military occupation....
When America’s economy collapsed in the Great Depression, a third constitutional moment was initiated by the New Deal. The administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and a Democratic-controlled Congress passed legislation significantly expanding the federal government’s intervention in the economy and establishing much of the administrative state....
None of the eras between these moments were tranquil....
Mr. Trump’s challenge is strikingly different. He aims to unbind the executive from constraints imposed by the other branches and the normal process of administrative lawmaking.
"Normal"... because the "third constitutional moment" changed the Constitution?
To stand, these changes will require the other players in our constitutional order to accept that the president by himself can make changes of such magnitude. That would be a fourth constitutional revolution....
We can discuss whether Trump is really attempting to do all that. I'm just inviting you to contemplate the way "a lot of law professors" have — in the past ± gone along with "radical transformation [that] violated the rules that governed normal politics." And there is potential to portray Trump as undoing that "third constitutional moment" and offering to return us to something closer to the original Constitution. Does he bring chaos or order? Presumably, following the normal processes, the courts will determine if they are presented with real disputes that can be resolved by law, and Trump might win. If he loses, maybe he will accept the traditional notion that the courts are the last word on the meaning of the law. He's said he will. If he does not, you can call it a crisis. But if the people embrace what he did, that's a moment.
Millman sketches out the argument for Trump:
The central justification for all of [Trump's] moves is the view that the American constitutional order has become sclerotic. The bureaucracy, it is claimed, operates with a mind of its own, unresponsive to either the people’s will or the nation’s interests. Congress is too divided and hesitant to make fundamental changes; it prefers to delegate interpreting the Constitution to the courts and regulatory rule making to the executive whenever possible. In this view, if anyone — especially the court — stands in the way of an energetic executive, it will be standing only for stasis and failure and should be ignored....
As you might imagine for a column in the NYT, Millman does not like where that argument goes. He calls it "Caesarian."
I'd spell that "Caesarean." Makes me think of Abraham Lincoln. What if we had "a new birth of freedom" and it had to be delivered by Caesarean?
Posts
103 comments:
Well done Dersh. Not going to Hell like the rest of you. He was a Democrat you know, up until they went bananas..
"They didn't introduce anybody who would have a neutral view of the Constitution, and they didn't give their readers an honest assessment of the issue."
We all know a constitutional law professor who is famous for being cruelly neutral and honest in her views of the law. They NYT should call Ann Althouse today. They know how to reach her.
This is all narrative from the Left. It's all they have: chaos and constitutional crisis.
How is it a constitutional crisis when the President, via his authorized agent, cuts off Social Security payments to a person who is 150 or stops payments for sex changes in Central America?
I want those Ivy League law profs and Adam Liptak of the NYT to answer that question.
Let’s wait until DOGE has completed its work. Let’s evaluate just where the crisis is then.
Perhaps it is just the crisis of the moment.
Repetition is all they have. They own the media, so they can repeat stuff a lot, the problem is that, for instance, even though the USSR had that advantage, people eventually know they are being lied to and tune it all out.
It’s the law professor buffalo drop.
Nice, Eva Marie.
"It has characteristics, notably, when one of the three branches tries to get out of its lane, assert too much power. "
"Too much" is doing a lot of work in this sentence, and then it is never defined. A "constitutional crisis" is when the rules we have set up don't provide a solution for our problems. If Trump gets the Supreme Court to go along with his interpretation —no crisis! He won the elections to appoint the justices, he got the ruling. If Trump simply ignored the courts, which he is not doing, *that* would be a "constitutional crisis," I suppose, but Biden did that, and nobody complained, he would just change a word or two and go ahead with his plan with no actual, you know, real world changes to his struck down policy.
"there's no fixed, agreed-upon definition of A Constitutional Crisis"
Yes, there is. Interestingly, it's the same definition used for "racism", " sexism", "Christian nationalism", " white supremacy", and a whole host of other terms used by the left, that is: anything that challenges the left.
Constitutional crisis is the new fascism.
WOLF!
I guess what I meant is that he never actually points to an instance where Trump has asserted "too much power," it's "cumulative" which is really his way of saying "trust me, I know it when I see it, and you wouldn't understand.
This whole thing has the ring of "threats to our democracy," which as I have said before, means "threats to our phony baloney jobs."
-Protesting a Democrat win = an insurrection
-A Republican winning the Presidency = Democracy dying in darkness
-Trump exercising POTUS powers = Authoritarianism
-Trump pushing back against the courts = A constituional crisis.
-Elon Musk helping Trump = Rule by Oligarchy.
All the media screeching the same hysterical phrases over and over. GOP moderates trying to calm them. "There, there, be reasonable, its not that bad". A toxic gaslite media enviroment.
BTW, everything Trump and his supporters do is wrong or bad. And Law Professors are 90 percent liberal/left Democats. They are just pushing the party line.
We’ve been through this same stupid before. These lawprofs are political hacks willing to besmirch themselves and their profession for the supposed good of leftie politics. They’ll be like rats off a sinking ship when the reversals come down and add to the Obama/Biden ofers list…
…go join the 51 intelligence experts choir legal hacks…
Its easy to laugh at the MSM hysteria, but it achieves its objective. We not talking about the courts insane over reach and blocking Trump from excercising his just POTUS powers. Instead, we're talking about Trump's feeble pushback. Its not about Democrats doing something wrong, its about "Republicans Pouncing".
DNC-MSM Attacks it never defends.
First they cried 'coup !', but nobody listened, because the Army wasn't involved and everybody liked the SecDef working out with the troops. So now, in a not-too-subtle appeal to authority, they are clamoring that it's a Constitutional Crisis. I think Dershowitz has a more balanced, better-grounded view.
At best, the flanking attack will delay what I hope is the inevitable. But it will only be a delay, and hopefully a short one. We'll know it's working when the RINOs start whinging. Watch for Miss Lindsey.
Breezy: "Let’s wait until DOGE has completed its work. Let’s evaluate just where the crisis is then."
The entire federal bureaucracy, far too many legislators and far too many judges have been completely corrupted with trillions of dollars and pure leftist/marxist power ideas over the decades. This corruption includes Epstein Island escapades and other similar blackmailable scenarios.
They cannot cannot and will not allow DOGE to continue its work, much less complete it. Much less allow Tulsi and RFK and Bondi and Kash and others to do to do their jobs....
.....yet, yet...something has changed. Right now, at this moment, the People appear to be getting leverage and gaining the upper hand. The Trump admin appears to have a sophisticated and correct response to this latest Russia Russia Russia-like Lawfare of 2025 and though it will cause some delays here and there, I believe the correct strategy is bing deployed.
2025 is not 2017.
But why isn't this normal litigation over the meaning of provisions of law and how that applies to real cases, filed in court, that need — and will get — deep analysis and measured deliberation? Why the freakout?
Well said. I wish the NYT would consult "scholars" outside their bubble, but alas they seem oblivious that any such bubble even exists.
"He was a Democrat you know, up until they went bananas."
Hahahaha! Of course, those who are themselves caught up in a delirium, hypnotized by a "Jim Jones" President--he asserting lies as truth, a truth laid down by God (the cult leader as he presents himself to his entranced herd)--will unavoidably see those who are rational, or at least, not entranced by their master, as the ones who are "bananas."
(Trump voters are already beginning to regret their choice in these first weeks of Der Drumpf's reign.
I'm just inviting you to contemplate the way "a lot of law professors" have gone along with "radical transformation [that] violated the rules that governed normal politics."
Our hostess asks us to wonder about the predictable chorus of a herd of law professors mooing verses from the leftie songbook as they chew over their collective TrumpHate cud while we are suffused as listeners in a green choking mist of leftie farts.
Nah. I’d rather go back and watch Little X pick his nose and leave his boy boogers on the corner of the Revolution desk. That’s far more healthy than breathing the air in the faculty lounge of academia.
- Krumhorn
The phrase was used 23 times, as if we could be convinced by repetition. - Same propaganda playbook. Of course liberal Phds jump in on the braindead actions. They are in on the grift.
Constitutional Crisis screams Justice LePetomane!
I've long worried that a Hercules strong enough to clean the stables could go too far like Julius C, so it's good that Trump is old.
Winning more seats in Congress in 2026 should ratify Trump's EOs with the people (and vice versa), even if the SC has already approved some of them. Then maybe the Congress can fix some laws, so future leftist EOs can't reverse things.
Hey! The Soetoro kid was a constitutional lecturer, lets ask him!
Let’s not forget that Cook announced himself to be the “rational” one in contrast to the rest of us. No wonder he’s so despondent. Even lost. He likes the green choking mist of the lefties herd farts.
Breathe in deeply, Cookie. You can always count on the cud chewing academy to supply and endless supply of leftie gas.
- Krumhorn
I dunno about “Constitutional Moment”, but with the left blocking badly needed reforms we are having a “constipational moment”.
It sure looks like there are a fair number of Democrat-appointed judges for whom the "Constitutional Crisis" argument is all they need to decide. A majority of the Colorado Supreme Court, for example. And federal judges granting TROs after a single ex parte hearing.
I think we can all agree it’s a Constitutional Crisis when they’re doing stuff but not a Constitutional Crisis when the stuff-doing is being done by us.
Americans are sick and tired of corrupt liberal judges and arrogant liberal college professors. They have blown their credibility. Nobody believes or bows to their "expertise" any more. Their opinions are bought and paid for and obviously driven by self-preservation. Neither are interested in promoting truth or justice. It's all bullshit.
Very good. Big changes initiated by FDR are called into question. Not all will be rolled back.
Trump and Musk are exploring the presidential envelope to the point that the Judicial branch becomes involved. That sounds like a reasonable and appropriate constitutional mechanism balanced by another plenary power making a check. Democrats are crying Wolf! because they are afraid how SCOTUS will rule.
It's ridiculous that examining the books and applying standard CPA methods is something of a crisis.
Trump voters are already beginning to regret their choice in these first weeks of Der Drumpf's reign.
Are they now? Then why is Donald Trump basking in the highest approval ratings he’s ever had. And not just in one poll, but three out of the last three. Not to mention 42% of black men?
Those of us who pay taxes are eager to see waste, fraud, and abuse dealt with energetically. The only reasons I can possibly imagine why Cookie doesn’t care about waste, fraud, and abuse is because (1) he must not pay taxes, and (2) he’s a beneficiary of the grift.
" A Constitutional Crisis. It has characteristics, notably, when one of the three branches tries to get out of its lane, asserts too much power. "
SO? Even the NYTs agrees that the unelected branch (the "judges") are COMPLETELY out of control?
What does the NYTs think we should DO to stop these out of control, Constitution defying unelected "judges"
???
Again - Cleaning up finical corruption on behalf of the American people - is not something the corrupt democratics and all of their religious brethren accept as normal.
There's no crisis. Trump is exercising clear executive power and the lefties don't like it. Saying it's a crisis doesn't make it one.
"Stay in lane" is Dem-corruption speak for "don't you dare"
It's ridiculous that examining the books and applying standard CPA methods is something of a crisis.
Thank you, Howard. I for one would Ike to know why it is a constitutional crisis to demand that Social Security recipients possess a valid SSN.
Should it read, "we're told, without evidence, law professors are saying..."
"What if we had 'a new birth of freedom' and it had to be delivered by Caesarean?"
Then Gettysburg would have been addressed "to womb it may concern."
Yes, I know. Very much a Peabody pun. Too bad there's no tuba disgorging a dissonant note/fart at the end.
The Left's ongoing emotional breakdown does not equal a Constitutional Crisis. This a problem of their own doing. By taking the unpopular side of issues that have 70-30 and 80-20 support from the American people, they have made their message "more selective" in the spinaltapian sense. Their real audience like CNN is reduced to the true believing red diaper-clutching fringe and the 15-20% of old people still hoping the Democrats of FDR and Truman are in that shitpile somewhere waiting to emerge and save the party.
There are ONLY two people, in the entire country, that are elected through a Nation-wide vote..
The President of The United States
and
The President of The United States Senate
The rest Legislative Branch are chosen through local elections
The "judges" in the Judicial Branch are not elected by ANYONE
"judges" are an INSULT to the entire concept of "democracy"..
Which is WHY the Democrat Party LOVES "judges"
Nice one, Bumble Bee @9:08am! Isn't it odd that even though the libtard media spent 8+ years exclaiming with breathless excitement that Purple Lips was a "constitutional scholar", they never seek his Olympian wisdom in these moments of constitutional crisis? He certainly never offers his expertise or experience either. Wonder why....
I think that there's a nonzero chance Cook is right. That's said, we as citizens owe the Trump administration 100-days before attacking his agenda. He was voted in by huge chunks of the US. Democrats are stupid avoiding bipartisan connections. Gotcha is counterproductive like smoking a exploding cigar.
Dems and their MSM Lap Poodles: ”WE DON’T NEED TO KNOW! WE DON’T NEED TO KNOW!”…
Constitutional conniption, maybe?
The GOP is smart to embrace democracy as a cudgel to beat the Democrats with their own petard.
"Constitutional Crisis" means nothing more than "We lefties aren't getting what we want." And OMGs ... we have a slightly originalist SCOTUS ... which might not find any more 'penumbra' or 'shadow'.
"It has characteristics, notably, when one of the three branches tries to get out of its lane, assert too much power " is crazy framing of the issue. The one and only reason Trump as Executive can assert such power is that is was long ago abdicated by Congress in their dysfunctional way. Perhaps the Ds felt secure in handing over budgetary discretion to the administrative state, but now that administration is headed by the one guy they claim not to trust. You caused this Democrats. You brought us here with GOPe assistance. Help fix it or fuck off.
Imagine if you had the power to impose and withdraw tariffs. You could buy put options, announce tariffs, cash in the puts, buy some call options, withdraw the tariffs, cash in the calls, then just rinse and repeat with another product. You’d probably need some rich friends to help you -- ideally guys you’d been on holiday with, who knew how to keep a secret. But as long you had immunity from prosecution for any actions you took while you had your tariff--touting superpower, you’d be laughing all the way to the Fed. I mean, I know that could never happen, right? But it’s a beautiful idea.
Especially if you changed the law to allow you to bribe people and act illegally overseas when 'doing business' so you could then hide your money and not pay taxes. But that would never happen.....
How would you know if Cook was right or wrong? He gives zero evidence of his assertions, just says stuff and expects it to carry some weight; just like Kaki.
"If I ignore all of your counterarguments, and only rely on news outlets that agree with me, I can make a strong case, or at least it seems strong on BlueSky!"
If you can't engage in the arguments, you can't be persuasive.
"The New York Times says “Musk Asserts Without Proof That Bureaucracy Is Rife With Fraud.” Seriously? The GAO — under Biden — estimated last year that we are losing $233-$521 billion *per year* to fraud. Guys, it’s right there. Why do you continue with this… fraud? "
X - Shellenberg
Beaten ... with my own petard ...
Crisis? What crisis?
A rogue judge or two doesn't make a crisis.
Unless every confrontation and every time the machine doesn't run absolutely smoothly is a crisis.
Again:
"The GAO — under Biden — estimated last year that we are losing $233-$521 billion *PER YEAR* to FRAUD."
The real Constitutional crisis IS the fraud itself - and those protecting the fraud.
"Imagine if you had the power to impose and withdraw tariffs."
Imagine if you had the power to bloc a billion dollar loan to Ukraine, you could get them to fire a person prosecuting the billionaire oligarch who hired your son Hunter, and who, according the laptop, sent Hunter an email asking him to make that prosecutor's case to go away, permanently.
You can do all kinds of stuff with power. Of course it would be hard to cover your tracks, you might need to do what Joe Biden did and create 20 shell corporations, controlled by you and your wife, for the purposes of shifting around payments.
Funny, but I don’t recall any of these progressive schleps crying about a “constitutional crisis” when Dementia Joe Biden thumbed his nose at the courts over student debt forgiveness or his continuing the buggering of landlords and rent forgiveness during the bat flu.
What's Past is Prologue, eg overturned Chevron Decision.
Kakistocracy is Nancy Pelosi's investment advisor.
The kinds of stuff you can do with power to get rich are the reasons that Democrats crave it so much. It was certainly not to do right by the American people, many of whom are seeing the Democrats for what they are.
Why exactly is it that we can't have voter ID or auditable elections?
It's "ray-cist" to audit elections, and it's "ray-cist" to audit USAID, etc, etc, rinse and repeat.
The Soviet-Democratic Press must keep all of the Religious Leftists in a state of panic.
Oh brother, anybody else watch Cook's video showing the massive regret from MAGA voters wailing and gnashing their teeth because they were tricked by Trump? Don't bother. It's 20 minutes of a Democrat Party soyboy whining and wishing with a few anonymous internet comments of unknown origin in which libtards claim that co-workers or children or fellow students are apologizing for the terrible mistake they made and begging forgiveness, and of course the libtard response to these MAGA tears of regret is to condemn them to death.
It was actually kind of instructive for those who consider Cook the thoughtful libtard of Althouse. To watch that video and swallow that premise shows a lack of critical thinking, and a blind devotion and faith in Democrat Party propaganda.
If anything, that video shows what unreasonable, unthinking, dangerous and braindead demagogues and sheep make up the Democrat Party. Shamelessly Stuck On Stupid.
So.... what's the road map to gaining a hearing on these injunctions from their present Federal District Court level to the Supreme Court level? Just wondering: Is it reasonable to predict the desperate cries of 'Muh Constitutional Crisis' possibly backfiring in a way that clears a more expedient,direct path to the USSC? The unintended consequences of desperate measures?
The Democrats are acting exactly as my wife did when I learned of her secret credit-card account that she had maxed out on expensive purses and jewelry.
Somehow it was MY fault for looking into it, even though I was the one expected to shoulder the burden of paying for it.
“ Never let a good crisis go to waste.” works best when you actually have a crisis. If you don’t have a crises handy…..well…… just create one. Actually the CFO of the news organization demands that you create crisis, every day, to keep the revenue flowing. Fear and flattery drives media profit. Yes they truly do profit off of creating division in society. They are that immoral.
Actually, when five or six or seven judges in local federal courts start thinking they can give orders to the President, that might rise to the level of a "Constitutional issue". If they keep it up, they could find themselves handcuffed in the back seat of a black SUV. I just hope there will be photos.
Earl Leroy “Buddy” Carter, a Republican member of Congress loyal to Donald Trump, introduced a bill to allow the U.S. to acquire Greenland, a self-ruling Danish territory and change its name to a patriotic reference to the American flag.
“America is back and will soon be bigger than ever with the addition of Redwhiteandblueland,” Carter said in a statement Tuesday. “We will proudly welcome [Denmark's Island] people to join the freest nation to ever exist.”
Freedom is just another word for stealing territory such as Panama, Canada, Greenland , and Gaza. "Buddy" Carter and DJT are brilliant thinkers, doncha know?
@Rich: But as long you had immunity from prosecution for any actions you took while you had your tariff--touting superpower, you’d be laughing all the way to the Fed.
The immunity the President enjoys only applies to official acts, you obtuse dunce. He can't be prosecuted for imposing or lifting tariffs, in other words.
Buying and selling stocks is not an official act, nor is conspiracy with or accepting bribes from cronies.
I forgot to mention the old hippie douchebag strumming a guitar in front of an American flag and mourning the end of democracy because Trump... what Belushi did to the guitar player in Animal House, that's what should be done with that douchebag's guitar.
Climate change is a first-order forcing of a kleptocratic conniption eruption.
Robert Cook, you can do so much better than "Der Drumpf." Please oh please, engage with the issues: is this a "constitutional crisis," a "constitutional moment," or neither? Since Trump is complying with the injunction(s) and going through the courts to challenge them, where's the fascism?
A crisis was evolving from conception of emanations from the penumbra of The Constitution. Fortunately, it was not a viable choice, and was still born in state sanctuaries, aborted in others. The cacophony of the kleptocracy can be heard in its progressive brays mainly on the plain to liberal license lost.
I think the panic at this point among those higher up on the theft and the grift, is that Musk, Trump, and Pam Bondi will flush out some low level whistleblowers willing to sing to same their asses. It's almost like a drug bust. The low level dealers get cut a deal to law enforcement and prosecutors can get to the big fish.
Just this morning; based on Trump legal team pushback, the little Hawaiian "judge" forced to retreat /"clarify' his order to stop looking for fraud, Trump admin omtinues to use standard fraud protection procedures and can cutoff the funding from FEMA to the New Soviet Democraticals luxury hotels for illegals in NYC program
That was just this morning.
Trump remains relatively quiet, allowing the next week or so of appeals to be lodged and sent up the chain without putting rhetorical heat on Roberts so we'll really see if that worm, without public heat from Trump, will do what is obviously and manifestly required at this "moment" and rein in his judiciary crammed full of obama/biden/clinton hawaiian judges.
If he doesnt, then, and only then, would a crisis arise. And the specter of Andrew Jackson would rise...
Get rid of America's new Fuhrer and his main company as well. Don't buy his dangerous Swasticars.
Jamie (10:10): ‘Robert Cook, you can do so much better than "Der Drumpf."’ It is charitable of you to assume this presumably because Cook is reasonably articulate. However, “Der Drumpf” accurately reflects his critical thinking skills.
Cook and Gadfly are doggy paddling. Struggling for a relevant argument. And many of the other liberal never Trump trolls are conspicuously absent. It is hard to defend the effort to not expose and weed out massive corruption. Corruption which steals from the poor, and has had the middle class struggling for decades.
Jamie: "Robert Cook, you can do so much better than "Der Drumpf."
LOL
No ha can't. After all these years posing as a radical in opposition to the establishment and "the man", in the end, just like Bernie Sanders and the rest of the fakers, Cookie has demonstrated he is just another NPC following the diktats from above.
Once again, one of the very best features of what has been a decade of Trump, ALL the masks are fully and completely off.
It’s only a constitutional crisis if you assume, hope (whatever) that federal courts are supreme without checks and balances. They are not! Leftmedia pet law professors are whores, not scholars.
Soy boy cat-lady gadfly: "Get rid of America's new Fuhrer and his main company as well. Don't buy his dangerous Swasticars."
Comments like these, antics of the New Soviet Democraticals, the screeching of the left/dems/LLR's in the streets gives me great joy and confidence for the days to come.
The gadfly's understand nothing, they've learned nothing, they are impervious to reality.
Its all good.
Gadfly - go hug your Liz Cheney blow-up doll - for comfort.
Has Baghdad Bob Cook not seen Trump's approval polls?
I don't mean this in any kind of personal way directed at anyone because there are certainly some very fine law professors out there, but I don't think the vast majority of Americans give two rips about what these law professors say about anything. Oooohh..the law professors...we are so impressed...they are sooo smaarrtt....ooohhh..This just seems like the 51 former senior intelligence officials who solemnly advised us all that the Biden laptop story was a Russian disinformation plot.
I wonder why the left thinks there is something compelling about getting a group of people together to spout the same yackety-yak at the rest of us. It's a herd mentality.
"Oh brother, anybody else watch Cook's video..."
One would have to read his comments to know he posted one, so- no.
Mainframe government is at its end. Mainframe government is no longer efficient, nor is it needed. The internet has empowered a fully distributed government - a government more "of the people, by the people." "Power to the people" the boomers used to sing and chant. Why would they oppose it now? Answer (indirectly): Clayton Christiansen's Destructive Innovation theory fits well here.
Gadfly said:
"Get rid of America's new Fuhrer"
Suggesting assassination here? You're such a good brownshirt - Gadlfy. Very loyal brownshirt.
The idea that we are going through a New Deal or a Civil War moment or crisis is ridiculous. We had the Hoover Commissions in the 1940s and 1950s and the Grace Commission of the 1980s to cut waste from the budget but neither got very far because of resistance from Congress and the bureaucracy. Sometimes the waste and fraud get to be too much, and you have to find a way to cut back the brush and mow the lawn
WF Buckley Jr told the story of a rope factory in Boston that was still producing rope for Navy sailing ships into the 1950s. It was proposed to close the plant down. Young Senator JF Kennedy wanted to keep the factory open in perpetuity. It was finally closed down in 1970 after 132 years of operation. To be fair, it was in the same complex as the restored War of 1812 frigate "Old Ironsides", but did the federal ropewalk have to stay in business for just one or two ships?
Washington DC area searches for "criminal defense attorneys" have tripled in recent days.
https://x.com/search?q=dc%20searches%20for%20criminal%20lawyer&src=typed_query
Robert Cook, you can do so much better than "Der Drumpf."
I'm curious why leftist dimwits think that his great-grandfather's decision to Anglicize his name at Ellis Island reflects in any way, good or bad, on Mr. Trump himself.
Also, why this doesn't apply to all the left-wing members of the tribe who did likewise, starting with Merrick Garland, John Kerry, Jon Stewart, and George Soros?
I used to enjoy (if not agree with) many of Cook's posts. He has really revealed himself to be less than he seemed recently.
These law professors are obviously ok with judge shopping to get the desired predetermined outcome. These crooks dedicate you career to the law, and then violate the basic standard of blind justice and the rule of law. How? Why? Because their survival and wealth depend on the continuation of corruption and theft. They have proven themselves worthless.
MSN = MicroSoft News.
Only losers trust Microsoft News.
MSNBC - is MicroSoft News. (NBC+MicroSoft)
Bill Gates himself - gave 50,000 Million to the idiot moron puppet - Kamala.
correction - 50 million
"'Trump voters are already beginning to regret their choice in these first weeks of Der Drumpf's reign.
"Are they now? Then why is Donald Trump basking in the highest approval ratings he’s ever had. And not just in one poll, but three out of the last three. Not to mention 42% of black men?"
Basking in the highest approval ratings he's ever had? Compared to what? Perhaps among those who have approved of him all along. In a one poll I found, as of this morning, he is equally as disliked as he is liked, with the "dislike" being a teensy bit greater than the "like," (though, admittedly, such differences are insignificant).
Here's another from The Pew Research Center, with more elaboration of the public's opinions of Der Drumpf.
For those above who chided me above for being so childish bu calling Despicable Donny, well...Drumpf was his family's original German name, and the "Der" is appropriate given his so-far totalitarian manner of "governing," along with his dubious and unsubstantiated claims of "success" at this or that something he claims to have achieved.
Lazarus: "The idea that we are going through a New Deal or a Civil War moment or crisis is ridiculous. We had the Hoover Commissions"
The dems are in complete disarray and have no other play in their playbook other than corrupt lawfare + dying legacy media talking points and a completely corrupted weaponized bureacracy/money laundering operation.
"'Trump voters are already beginning to regret their choice in these first weeks of Der Drumpf's reign."
LOL
The oh so "sophisticated" consumer of media Cookie falls for the Rupar-ed truncated videos made by Trump supporters posing as disappointed while leading to their video punchlines against stupid dems opposing DOGE's exposure of corruption.
These truncated videos have fooled many suckers on the left...just like cookie, who is nothing more than a dem party apparatcik.
" A Constitutional Crisis. It has characteristics, notably, when one of the three branches tries to get out of its lane, asserts too much power. "
With the libs, the left, listening to their MSM, my rule of thumb is to look in the direction that their MSM is trying to distract us from looking. The problem right now is that the lower level judiciary, packed by recent Dem Presidents, at the behest of esp leftist Attorneys General, is significantly intruding into the inner working of the Executive Branch, which is trying to get its Deep State and their employees under control, as promised by Trump during his campaign for President. Separation of Powers says for these leftist activist judges to get back in their own friggen lane, and stick to actual Cases and Controversies before them.
I expect that the 6-3 Supreme Court, will be busy its next year, on its Emergency Docket, slapping back into line the insurgents in the Judiciary Branch that it heads. We know which way that they will jump, from their recent decisions in favor of Trump. Three Justices are strong conservatives, very cognizant about what the Dems are trying to pull. The soft power of the Judiciary is at stake, so they will typically have the Chief Justice’s support. The other two will follow. That makes it a fairly secure 6-3 voting block.
How do we know that it is the soft power of the Judicial Branch that is at stake? Because people like Dershowitz started mentioning Marbury v Madison - the original source of the Judiciary’s soft power. He knows what’s going on and the stakes, and so does CJ Roberts.
Dershowitz also mentions that President Andrew Jackson is said to have responded to the Supreme Court's ruling in Worcester v. Georgia with the words "[Chief Justice] John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!" Marshall took power for the Judiciary with Marbury, and Jackson asked him how he intended to exercise it, and enforce the will of the Judiciary, against the will of the elected President and his Executive Branch. The answer is that for over 200 years now, it has used its soft power, based on the appearance of impartiality. And that is what these leftist Dem judges and state Attorneys General threaten.
I used to enjoy (if not agree with) many of Cook's posts. He has really revealed himself to be less than he seemed recently.
Yeah. He's made trenchant points in the past and was not nearly as deranged as some of the others, especially the hysterical females we know and don't love.
Sad to see him reduced to name-calling and passing along Bluesky rage-memes, instead of making substantial contributions to the discussion of the shocking things Musk is uncovering.
Let me add that no one, with any brains, wants to cross Trump and get on his enemies’ list. Least of all, CJ Roberts. He has the Bully Pulpit, after his big win last year, and knows better than almost anyone, how to use it.
Why do these con law experts never discuss Mississippi v Johnson, Myers v US, Humphrey’s Executor v US, and Sellia Law v CFPB to give us a more balanced view of what the SC has held the President can and cannot do.
Basking in the highest approval ratings he's ever had? Compared to what?
Compared to all the other times people were asked about their approval of his job as President.
You're welcome.
gadfly said...
"Get rid of America's new Fuhrer and his main company as well. Don't buy his dangerous Swasticars."
How old are you? Twelve?
Grow up.
Post a Comment
Comments older than 2 days are always moderated. Newer comments may be unmoderated, but are still subject to a spam filter and may take a few hours to get released. Thanks for your contributions and your patience.