John G. Roberts, Jr.
Chief Justice Legislator of the Supreme Court
The Founding Fathers envisioned (in Constitutional America) a judicial branch of government in which the Justices of the Supreme Court adjudicated the laws. Now in Post-Constitutional America, the justices have become legislators, a third branch of law-creators. (Under Obama and his phone and his pen, the Executive Branch, charged with executing the laws, became a second branch of law-creators.)
Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts had a sound reputation as a highly competent jurist and Constitutional advocate. Yet when presented with choosing the deciding opinion for the (un)constitutionality of the Obamacare individual mandate, he betrayed his oath, his country, and the Constitution in writing his Majority opinion filled with pathetically illogical arguments, inventing a new definition of taxation that contravenes long-standing precedent. (Use this link to review the History.)
Advocates and detractors have attempted to explain this incongruity with assorted claims that he eschewed his conservative values to place the court in a more popular light with the great unwashed masses, who have no idea what the Constitution (or liberty) means. Read for example, the National Review article, Let’s Drop the Charade: The Supreme Court Is a Political Branch, Not a Judicial One.
We, however, defer to a simpler but darker idea, that Obama and/or Hillary Clinton threatened him with a Keyser Söze assault, along with a subtle hint that he should review the Clinton Body Count.
James “Jimmy The Weasel” Comey
Director of the FBI
Even with a corruptly incomplete investigation full of unasked questions (he was never an FBI investigator), Comey detailed a list of Hillary Clinton’s crimes that the FBI uncovered, then finished with malarkey that no prosecutor or grand jury would indict her. Of course, it is not the FBI’s job to suggest or refuse impaneling a grand jury, recommend a special prosecutor, or decide about indictment. That all belongs to the Department of (In)Justice. His job was to make a through investigation and present all the evidence to the DOJ, without playing the corrupt little game that Loretta Lynch promised to play, leaving the supposed decision to him rather than publicly leaving it to her to explain away.
Why might Comey do such a bizarre thing. Again we defer to a simple but dark idea, that Hillary Clinton threatened him with a Keyser Söze assault, and a review of the Clinton Body Count.
An impending mutiny (of offered resignations) from a huge group of the FBI investigative agents landed on Comey’s desk. Meanwhile, a computer appeared full of email correspondence between Hillary Clinton and her chained at the hip aide, Huma Abedin. The computer belonged to Abedin’s renowned estranged pervert husband, Anthony Weiner. Events unfolded quickly:
- Comey publicly announced a reopened investigation into the Clinton emails, averting a mass exodus of actual investigative agents.
- Loretta Lynch had a hyssie-fit.
- Obama had a shit-hemorrhage.
- Abedin disappeared from Clinton’s side like a fart in a hurricane.
- Democrats suddenly changed their uproarious approval of Comey over his wrong announcement that Clinton should go free of legal consequence into howls of derision against Comey for announcing the reopened investigation.
- An analyst at The Daily Wire observed that in such rare circumstances, two wrongs do make a right.
November 7th News
The Weasel had just read 650,000 emails and said, “Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton.”
So should we all ignore this Congressional review video?
At least mathematical negative multipliers still work: (–wrong) × (–wrong) × (–wrong) = –wrong³
Or in layman terms: three wrongs do make a wrong.
Attorneys Shysters General of the United States
An Attorney General would/should both enforce and obey the law. Obama’s Shysters General did neither. They are both utterly corrupt pond scum! It would be astounding that either of them ever could have risen to such a high office but for their traitorous nominator. The senates that advised and consented to this evil pair deserve our scorn and derision. We lament that the citizenry’s effective recourse of the past has fallen out of favor; namely, to tar and feather corrupt politicians and ride them out of town on a rail.
Eric Holder
Included here for completeness, Congress held him in contempt for his lies and operating a criminal gun-running enterprise, Operation Fast and Furious, to gang-leader murderers in Mexico. Unfortunately for the American people, he has not been put into prison, where he belongs. He deserves the harsh language we applied to him elsewhere on this website.
Loretta Lynch
Before becoming the corrupt replacement for corrupt Eric Holder, Lynch was the queen of civil asset forfeiture abuse, using a law originally intended to hobble criminal drug dealers. Instead, Lynch took hundreds of millions of dollars from weak, innocent citizens who were never convicted of (or even charged with) a crime, to hand over to the powerful government, and her own self-aggrandizement. For that alone, we judge her as morally depraved and deserving of the harsh language applied to her elsewhere on this website.
Lynch spent more than half an hour in an attempted secret meeting on her airplane in Phoenix with former President Bill “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” Clinton, husband of the woman then under investigation for security felonies with her private email server. He also owned that server. This was an obvious violation of Ethics 101, specifically and literally 5 CFR 2635.101(b)(14), which requires that the Shyster General avoid any appearance of impropriety. She suggested it was all okay because she wouldn’t get caught doing it again. Lynch, prosecute thyself. Perhaps better: Lynch, lynch thyself.
Meanwhile, Lynch maintains a lowlife evasiveness. Congress members Mike Pompeo and Marco Rubio suggested that her response to their query about a transfer of money to Iran was akin to invoking Fifth Amendment protections.
On a personal note from site creator Gautier Van Cleave: my late father worked for the Federal Government as a defense contract quality assurance inspector. He verified quality compliance for the Lunar Excursion Module, Apollo missions, satellite components, and the like. He brought a coffee thermos with him to work sites, because he wouldn’t accept a cup of coffee from a contractor, lest there be a microscopic appearance of impropriety. “Use their bathroom, use their water fountain—that’s it!”
Compare with Lynch, who ignores ethics. She tried to keep her job hoping Hillary would get elected.
Bernie Sanders
Imagine a kindly-looking old man handing out candy to children from his station wagon. Imagine the candy was poisoned. Would it matter that the old man thought that poison was good?
Former Democratic Party candidate Bernie, senile since childhood, is a monster. He offers free poisoned candy to unsuspecting children—deadly, poisonous candied Socialism, a system of evil and death, with an unremitting legacy of social and economic destruction, along with history’s largest pile of dead millions.
Having been an avid socialist for his adult life (he honeymooned in the Soviet Union), he has seen socialism first-hand. Being perpetually senile, he didn’t notice that there are no free goods and services to hand out, that someone has to pay for them, and that it is morally depraved to steal money from the productive to hand over to the non-productive.
A person who constantly shouts about “fair share” from the rich ought to say clearly what that fair share is. 10%? 15%? 50%? 90%? 100%?
Just everything you own, your acquiescence, and your life, too.
“We cannot expect the Americans to jump from capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have Communism.”
Nikita Khrushchev, 1959
DNC (Democratic National Committee)
The Democratic National Committee has been “in the tank” for Hillary Clinton from the start of the current election season. The Party leadership, like the party itself, has a long history of dishonesty. At the 2012 Democratic convention, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa tried to approve a platform plank about Jerusalem. He required three different voice votes, each of which obviously did not meet the required 2/3 approval, but he simply declared the vote approved. In 2016, party chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz was discovered to be favoring Hillary’s campaign and hurting Bernie’s. After her forced resignation, her replacement Donna Brazile was found to have been using her CNN insider connections to feed debate and town hall questions in advance.
The Democratic Party has a history of slavers, racists, the Klan, eugenics, and much more.
For some enlightening history, you can read the Dinesh D’Souza book Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party. For the disc version of the movie, see Hillary’s America.
“The trouble ain’t that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain’t distributed right.”
Mark Twain
Debbie Wasserman Schmutz – Former DNC chairwoman
Yes, we can spell Schultz, but Schmutz means Dirt in both German and Yiddush, and that fits her perfectly. A Congresswoman from Florida, she had been the chairwoman of the DNC until the discovery that she had been using her role to sabotage the Bernie Sanders campaign in favor of the Hillary Clinton campaign. She is fully steeped in socialist ideology, pushing it into the Democratic Party’s mainstream.
Donna Brazile – Acting DNC charwoman
Yes, we can spell chairwoman correctly, too, but …. In October, she resigned in disgrace (was fired) from her role as a CNN contributor after revelations that she sent questions to Hillary Clinton’s campaign in advance of a CNN debate and a Town Hall event. Further revelations indicated additional improprieties of questions in advance to the Hillary Campaign. When caught, she hemmed and hawed and babbled about being a Christian woman, as if that is a replacement for either admitting corruption or lying about it. That the DNC hasn’t tossed her out as charred-chair shows their easy tolerance of corruption. As long as she can keep getting dead Republicans to vote Democratic.
Keyser Söze
Mr. Söze is a fictional character from the 1995 Oscar-winning movie, The Usual Suspects directed by Bryan Singer. He is an incredibly brutal criminal and murderer—a peerless, psycho butcher. When Hungarian mobsters hold his wife and children at gunpoint in front of him, he shoots his family dead, then kills all but one of the mobsters. A character, Verbal Kint, reveals Söze’s methodology as:
“He lets the last Hungarian go. He waits until his wife and kids are in the ground and then he goes after the rest of the mob. He kills their kids, he kills their wives, he kills their parents and their parents’ friends. He burns down the houses they live in and the stores they work in, he kills people that owe them money. And like that he was gone. Underground. Nobody has ever seen him since.”
Back to reality:
What could a threat of a Keyser Söze assault achieve from someone powerful, especially from a major political figure? Could it induce iniquity in an otherwise moral person, even another very powerful public figure? Do we have direct evidence this has happened? No.
Do we have circumstantial indications? Yes. See John Roberts, who publicly adopted irrational positions, and James Comey, who changed from a renowned straight-shooter into a weasel. Note especially the Clinton Body Count.
The Media
The Fourth Estate, for those unfamiliar with the term, most commonly refers to the news media especially print media, both hardcopy and web-based, along with radio and television broadcasting. The hard copy media (newspapers and magazines) and TV currently lean to the left with a lean reminiscent of a double-black-diamond ski slope. The notable exception is Fox News, which leans right, but remarkably provides a nearly omnipresent sprinkling of left-leaning spokespersons to present contrasting viewpoints.
Mainstream/Lamestream — The Fourth Estate is America’s Fifth Column
Throughout her campaign, Hillary Clinton has had no need for toilet paper. The mainstream media remains a compliant and even enthusiastic mouth service for all manner of cleanup needs. Especially noteworthy is CNN, scurrilously but realistically dubbed the Clinton News Network. The following article from The Daily Wire speaks for itself:
New Evidence Points to CNN Helping Hillary Cheat at Debate. See also Donna Brazile on this site.
For those unfamiliar with the term Fifth Column, it refers to a group of people who act traitorously and subversively out of a secret sympathy with an enemy of their country. For example, the mainstream media has totally ignored the recent revelations about the corrupt Justice Department attempting to suppress the FBI investigations of the Clinton Foundation and overall giving cover for Hillary. More than half the people in the country are completely unaware of it because they receive their news only through the mainstream media.
“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”
Thomas Jefferson
Fox News
Fox News Channel (FNC), also known as Fox News, is an American basic-cable television and satellite news channel, launched more than 20 years ago. While opinion and commentary programming is centrist and right-leaning, news reporting maintains a high degree of impartiality and thoroughness. We recommend for their particular value and integrity Special Report with Bret Baier, Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, and Journal Editorial Report with Paul Gigot. Even commentary programming typically includes a cadre of left-leaning Fox contributors for a fair attempt at balanced presentation, along with an assortment of rabid leftists who ably demonstrate the horrors of the socialist dystopia that they advocate.
Earlier Strong Republican Candidates
Donald Trump’s defects could have sunk him easily in this election. Two earlier Republican candidates were strong contenders who could have presented crushing opposition to Hillary Clinton.
Ted Cruz
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz was the most successful Republican candidate other than Donald Trump. Without Trump’s wild contrast, Cruz was the most antiestablishment candidate, sometimes presenting friction with fellow Republican members of Congress. His devotion to the Constitution appeals to many conservative Republicans and some Libertarians, as does his disdain for President Obama. In a November 2014 Senate speech, Cruz accused the president of being “openly desirous to destroy the Constitution and this Republic.”
If Donald Trump had not become the Republican candidate, Cruz would have filled that role to great effect and immense consternation to the Clinton campaign. Unlike Trump, Cruz is supremely articulate, an unmatched debater, intimately familiar with all policy issues, and free of personal scandal. His discussions are highly coherent, never wandering down the rabbit holes where Trump-speak meanders. The notion of a large Republican “Never Cruz” voting bloc is unthinkable.
As the first Hispanic to clerk for a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, he would have engaged a large portion of the Hispanic vote.
Disclosure: Gautier Van Cleave contributed modest funds to Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign.
Marco Rubio
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio is the Republican candidate that the Clinton campaign most feared opposing. Were he the candidate instead of Donald Trump, he would capture large voting blocs that eluded Trump. Rubio is young, handsome, personable, intelligent, knowledgeable of policy issues, a man of the people, and free of personal scandal. He would capture large voting blocks of conservatives, moderates, women, a huge portion of Hispanics, Gen Xers, and millennials. As with Cruz, the notion of a large Republican “Never Rubio” voting bloc is unthinkable.
Disclosure: Gautier Van Cleave contributed modest funds to Marco Rubio’s presidential campaign.
None of the Above — (NOTA)
Sometimes, voters find no palatable candidate or option available on the ballot. In all Libertarian intra-party votes None of the above (acronym NOTA) appears as a voter choice. For the November 8 presidential election, the conceptually equivalent choice None of these candidates appeared on the Nevada ballot and received 2.6% of the vote.
We recommend this as a voter option, however it is entirely possible that the departing Senate Minority Leader (and bottom of the barrel as a human being) Harry Reid, won his senate seat through None of these candidates voters diluting the vote for his opponent. Thus, the next topic.
Instant-Runoff Voting
We recommend Instant-Runoff Voting also called Ranked Choice Voting as a voting process that promotes majority choice, yet affords reasonable opportunity for voters of minority parties. Such voters can cast votes without either wasting their vote or diluting their preferred intentions. This voting process has been used in numerous American cities and in the state of North Carolina. A thorough explanation of the topic is available on Wikipedia.
