Oh Charlie, how I have missed your voice in my ear. I love Tim and still listen to the daily podcast but you just have a way of cutting through the nonsense that I particularly enjoy. Oh sweet Mary, Joseph, Jesus and the wee donkey indeed….
For decades since Roe v. Wade I've heard right wingers lamenting about legislating from the bench. From my not particularly highly educated perspective, what the Supreme Court is doing now looks to be amending the Constitution from the bench. They are redefining the Constitutional definition of the office of presidency.
For some time now, I have been concerned with the lack of educational standards, causing the dumbing down of America.
Add to that the death of civility and the worship of trump and ‘things’ look grim for the future of democracy.
I am uncomfortably nestled in a rural community in a southern red state and therefore see the worst of the worst.
My conclusion is, we, the people, have allowed the country to slide into this danger zone.
It is our lack of commitment, starting in towns, cities, counties and states and reaching all the way to Congress and the White House, that put trump in office in the first place.
Therefore, we are the only ones that can fix what’s broken.
Every ‘entitled’, ‘me first’, ‘I want a trophy’ person must care enough to stand up for democracy.
If it doesn’t matter to each of us… we deserve what we get!
Samuel Alito can’t for the life of him figure out why folks look at him in such a disdainful way.
He seems perfectly so in his own right to be aggrieved . Aggrieved because delusions of his own self entitlement. Condescending to all of his ill conceived lesser thans!
Thanks Charlie I always appreciate your thoughts, great to see you again. Judge Luttig is also so clear and a voice of reason. Love the pics!
After Jan 6 and throughout this “justice moves slow but fine” unfolding, I have often wondered if someday we would need to fight back - literally - to take back our democracy. I have been impressed with Jack Smith’s efforts and the level at which he and his team are leveraging the law to seek true and fair justice. So needed on multiple levels - as an effective example and for holding accountability as a counterbalance to freedom.
If our worst fears come true from the SCOTUS arguments, are we creating a constitutional monarchy? 😱 The pendulum swings BOTH ways, always. Oy.
And, I also hold tremendous hope that all of this is testing our virtues, beliefs and principles - and from this, we can - together - evolve to another level of true democracy over the next decade. Holding hope that we move from right vs. wrong to a deeper understanding of and wisdom in polarity management. Sometimes we need to see the edge to understand the ground we stand on.
Has someone started writing a parody column/Xitter/stack as Chief Justice Roberts' unspoken thoughts? Because it's pretty clear he would much prefer not to have the current cases to decide or colleagues to decided them with. I will leave you all to imagine a piece on his efforts to avoid Gini at a dinner party.
I would have difficulty believing that even this Supreme Court would buy the argument that pulling a coup to prevent the peaceful transfer of power and remain in office over an opponent who defeated them in an election would be a legitimate official act. I don’t disagree that some official acts shouldn’t be prosecuted, but frankly they should’ve had a per curiam ruling already saying,
“While there are valid questions as to the extent of presidential immunity from prosecution for his answers to political questions, we need not reach those questions in this case. None of Mr. Trump’s actions being adjudicated in any of these cases involve any valid political questions. Whether a president is required to cede the office after losing an election is not a political question, nor is refusal to surrender classified documents after leaving office and obstructing the government’s efforts to recover them. The appellant’s motion is denied with extreme prejudice.”
Thanks so much, Charlie, for your words and copying over Judge Luttig’s post from X. I have the sick feeling about them sending it back to the 5th Circuit so I remind myself to stay in the moment, so to speak. But in like-minded spaces like this I feel hopeful.
So happy to have found your Now-and-Then Shots on important political events of this era. I especially enjoy the addition of dog pictures--Auggie is a beauty!
Would welcome Judge Luttig’s thoughts on the impact on the Court of even a 5-4 ruling against immunity let alone the reverse - what would be the reputation and future credibility of a Court that decides to grant a former President complete immunity from prosecution? Don’t think Roberts will like the impact on his legacy as Chief. But that will be the least of it. What happens if 60% of the nation believes the. court is corrupt?
Oh Charlie, how I have missed your voice in my ear. I love Tim and still listen to the daily podcast but you just have a way of cutting through the nonsense that I particularly enjoy. Oh sweet Mary, Joseph, Jesus and the wee donkey indeed….
For decades since Roe v. Wade I've heard right wingers lamenting about legislating from the bench. From my not particularly highly educated perspective, what the Supreme Court is doing now looks to be amending the Constitution from the bench. They are redefining the Constitutional definition of the office of presidency.
For some time now, I have been concerned with the lack of educational standards, causing the dumbing down of America.
Add to that the death of civility and the worship of trump and ‘things’ look grim for the future of democracy.
I am uncomfortably nestled in a rural community in a southern red state and therefore see the worst of the worst.
My conclusion is, we, the people, have allowed the country to slide into this danger zone.
It is our lack of commitment, starting in towns, cities, counties and states and reaching all the way to Congress and the White House, that put trump in office in the first place.
Therefore, we are the only ones that can fix what’s broken.
Every ‘entitled’, ‘me first’, ‘I want a trophy’ person must care enough to stand up for democracy.
If it doesn’t matter to each of us… we deserve what we get!
Samuel Alito can’t for the life of him figure out why folks look at him in such a disdainful way.
He seems perfectly so in his own right to be aggrieved . Aggrieved because delusions of his own self entitlement. Condescending to all of his ill conceived lesser thans!
Thanks Charlie I always appreciate your thoughts, great to see you again. Judge Luttig is also so clear and a voice of reason. Love the pics!
After Jan 6 and throughout this “justice moves slow but fine” unfolding, I have often wondered if someday we would need to fight back - literally - to take back our democracy. I have been impressed with Jack Smith’s efforts and the level at which he and his team are leveraging the law to seek true and fair justice. So needed on multiple levels - as an effective example and for holding accountability as a counterbalance to freedom.
If our worst fears come true from the SCOTUS arguments, are we creating a constitutional monarchy? 😱 The pendulum swings BOTH ways, always. Oy.
And, I also hold tremendous hope that all of this is testing our virtues, beliefs and principles - and from this, we can - together - evolve to another level of true democracy over the next decade. Holding hope that we move from right vs. wrong to a deeper understanding of and wisdom in polarity management. Sometimes we need to see the edge to understand the ground we stand on.
Has someone started writing a parody column/Xitter/stack as Chief Justice Roberts' unspoken thoughts? Because it's pretty clear he would much prefer not to have the current cases to decide or colleagues to decided them with. I will leave you all to imagine a piece on his efforts to avoid Gini at a dinner party.
I would have difficulty believing that even this Supreme Court would buy the argument that pulling a coup to prevent the peaceful transfer of power and remain in office over an opponent who defeated them in an election would be a legitimate official act. I don’t disagree that some official acts shouldn’t be prosecuted, but frankly they should’ve had a per curiam ruling already saying,
“While there are valid questions as to the extent of presidential immunity from prosecution for his answers to political questions, we need not reach those questions in this case. None of Mr. Trump’s actions being adjudicated in any of these cases involve any valid political questions. Whether a president is required to cede the office after losing an election is not a political question, nor is refusal to surrender classified documents after leaving office and obstructing the government’s efforts to recover them. The appellant’s motion is denied with extreme prejudice.”
I hope that you and the dogs are enjoying life with a little slowdown, but I'm always happy to see and read your comments.
I miss your dulcet tones.
Thanks so much, Charlie, for your words and copying over Judge Luttig’s post from X. I have the sick feeling about them sending it back to the 5th Circuit so I remind myself to stay in the moment, so to speak. But in like-minded spaces like this I feel hopeful.
😭😭😭😭😭🤯🤯🤯😱😱😱
Brilliant!
Rather than Gentleman Jack on the rocks, I am promising myself a weekend break from SCOTUS tea leaf reading.
Time to decompress!
The former President will not get blanket even if “imperfect” and not unanimous.
Immunity
So happy to have found your Now-and-Then Shots on important political events of this era. I especially enjoy the addition of dog pictures--Auggie is a beauty!
Would welcome Judge Luttig’s thoughts on the impact on the Court of even a 5-4 ruling against immunity let alone the reverse - what would be the reputation and future credibility of a Court that decides to grant a former President complete immunity from prosecution? Don’t think Roberts will like the impact on his legacy as Chief. But that will be the least of it. What happens if 60% of the nation believes the. court is corrupt?
Whatever has happened with originalism and textualism? Thought that was the drug that many on SCOTUS got high on.