President Trump, with respect, start ruthlessly purging the U.S. general officer corps

President Trump:

Last time we discussed your refusal to abide by the Constitution’s hard-and-fast war-making provision, a decision that merits — as it did for most of your post-1945 predecessors — impeachment proceedings. Waging war in the manner you did in Syria is the work of an absolute monarch or a dictator, not that of a popularly elected president of this republic.

Today, we must discuss a topic that has been covered in this space on multiple occasions; namely, the need for you to immediately purge — via forced retirement — scores of your general officers. The American fetish for treating these officers as god-like wonders is baseless, and must be curtailed to the greatest possible extent. Among the most obvious reasons they merit forced retirement are:

–They and their predecessors have not won a war since 1945. In truth, they have won nothing in the most war-filled 72 years in American history.

–They have regularly betrayed the military men and women entrusted to their care by American parents by taking those troops to fight in wars that neither they nor their political masters intended to win. I do not know of a single case, since 1945, when a general officer resigned and told the citizenry that he did so because he refused to lead their soldier-children into a war no one meant to win, and in which the rules-of-engagement made those soldier-children targets rather than killers.

–They hold their positions for venal self-interest. To understand why no general has resigned and told the foregoing truth to the public, just survey the membership of America’s corporate boards of directors. Those boards are loaded with former generals who are making more mounds of money to add to their already luxurious pensions. The formula-for-success for U.S. general officers obviously is: keep silent, get use to losing, get your troops killed for nothing, and you will be generously rewarded when you retire.

–They are incompetent and, apparently, shoddily educated men and women. One example should suffice. They have been waging war, at various levels of intensity, against Islamists since Osama bin Laden’s declaration of war in 1996, and they have lost on every field of battle on which they have engaged the Islamists. Mr. President, did you know that our Islamist enemies are not professionally trained soldiers; that they are armed almost entirely with small arms, some of Korean War vintage; that they have no air cover or naval support; and that their funding, supply lines, and safe havens are always at risk? Did you know that this is the kind of paramilitary force that has consistently humiliated the United States and its military for two decades, one that has forced your canting generals to obliquely admit to being losers and fantasists with the words like “There is no military solution to this conflict” and “The Islamists have nothing to do with Islam”.

–They are thoroughgoing liars. Again, one example will suffice. Since at least 2003-2004, every Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and every U.S. general officer commanding in Afghanistan, has told the American people that: (1) the remnants of the Taleban, al-Qaeda, and other Islamist groups were being eliminated; (2) that our democracy- and nation-building efforts were bearing durable results; and (3) that the Afghan military was on the verge of being able to defend its country with minimal foreign assistance. Each statement was a transparent lie every time it was spoken, and the general officers who spoke them knew they were lies. Today, the truth is that al-Qaeda, the Islamic State, and the Taleban are thriving in Afghanistan, while the Afghan government and its military are collapsing. No number of additional lies will save either. Are these dishonest men and women the ones you are going to trust to restore America’s greatness? They are much more likely to again cover the republic in infamy.

Now is the moment, Mr. President, to fall back on you instincts, commonsense, and, most important, the non-interventionist demands of the people who elected you. America has no life-and-death national interests in Syria or the rest of the Middle East. Very few citizens want to expend trillions of additional tax dollars and their kids’ lives on a war there that is not necessary; which would be fought for Israeli, Saudi, and U.S. corporate interests; and which your generals would surely lose. So, dump your in-house, Cheney-sounding, Neocon war-monger, General McMaster; immediately ban the self-admitted criminal General Petraeus– who lost wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and then deliberately compromised classified information — from the White House grounds; and then get on with a wide-ranging purge that can do nothing but improve the the quality, commonsense, and nationalism of the U.S. general-officer corps.

With this done, Mr. President, recall how much essential work you have pledged to do at home, and how sick your supporters are of unnecessary, interventionist, and always lost wars. Then, Sir, look around the nation and understand two irrefutable facts: (a) that America is located in North America, 5,000 miles from the Middle East’s idiot wars, wars which cannot come here save through the continued lax enforcement of border and immigration laws, and (b) that the republic’s security, unity, and prosperity would not be damaged if those distant peoples killed one another for however long it takes for their wars to burn out, or until there is not a single living soul from Morocco eastward to India.

America First, Mr. President, always, America First.

Posted in Articles | Tagged , | 3 Comments

If you have time, Mr. President, Senator Paul can help you learn the Constitution means what it says

“While we all condemn the atrocities in Syria, the United States was not attacked. The President needs congressional authorization for military action as required by the Constitution, and I call on him to come to Congress for a proper debate. Our prior interventions in this region have done nothing to make us safer, and Syria will be no different.” Senator Rand Paul, (R-Kentucky), 7 April 2017

A central concern of the Founding generation, when writing the Constitution, was to ensure that no one man, or one man and his clique, could take the republic to war. To that end, the Constitution delegates the citizenry’s power to declare war solely to its servants in Congress, and, in doing so, uses language that makes it clear that the Congress cannot delegate this power to the executive branch of the government. The ability of a president to order military action was — and is — tightly limited to instances in which the United States is attacked or, perhaps, if a clear threat must be preempted.

Since 1955, however, every president and every Congress have acted in clear and deliberate violation of the Constitution’s allocation of war-making powers. In 1955, the Congress passed a resolution — called  an “Authorization for the Use of Military Force” (AUMF)  — that allowed President Eisenhower to do what he wanted, when he wanted to do it, with U.S. military forces in the defense of Formosa (Taiwan) against Mao’s China. Later, the Vietnam war began with another AUMF, and every other U.S. war since Vietnam has started with one, save for those which the president started off his own hook — the Obama/Clinton Libyan war, for example, — without even bothering to seek an unconstitutional delegation of the war-making power from Congress.

Your 6 April 2017 attack on a Syrian military airfield/chemical-storage depot, Mr. President, is the latest example of this unconstitutional war-making. The barrage of 60 cruise missiles — worth about $5.5 billion — was, as usual for the U.S. military, a feckless exercise in concrete-smashing. As in Bill Clinton’s Serbia war, the national government attacked a state that had not harmed the United States, and in which the republic has no genuine national interests at stake. All of this was done via the decision and then orders of one man — advised by his unelected advisers — for the U.S. military to conduct an unconstitutional act of offensive war, as if the republic is an absolute and so lawless monarchy.

President Trump, was your pledge to install a commonsense, non-interventionist and  America First foreign policy just lying words? I trusted that they were not, but now I wonder. You appear to have been genuinely shaken by the chemical attacks and the deaths that resulted therefrom. Yes, Mr. Trump, war is tough and bloody, and people of all ages get killed, just ask some Gold Star families. But if you truly launched 60 cruise missiles because you were overcome by your personal emotions after seeing the results of the chemical attack, your temperament is worrisome. Indeed, if you attacked because you felt bad about the deaths in Syria, you created a situation in which the Founders’ genius has never been on better display than in their creation of a document that tried to make sure that no single distraught individual could use the republic’s military power to seek revenge for his personal pain.

What have you and the pro-war Americans gained from the attacks, Mr. Trump? Are you and they enjoying soothed sensitivities and weeping less? Well, good on you and them. Other than some smashed-up military facilities, a handful of dead Syrians, and 20 or so destroyed Syrian aircraft, you, your generals, and advisers achieved only a disgrace.

–You ignored constitutional requirements and you attacked a state that did not threaten the republic. These are two distinct and self-inflicted defeats for the rule of law.

–You probably will see he Russians and the Iranians station additional aircraft squadrons of their own in Syria, and more sophisticated anti-aircraft systems, to replace Syrian losses and issue a silent challenge to you to come after them.

–You have certainly focused Syrian and Iranian irregular forces in the Syria and Iraq on the task of killing U.S. Marines and soldiers in response.

–You followed the attack by placing more sanctions on Syria, which appears to mean that, as in Iraq under Clinton and Bush, the killing of civilians  — including kids like those you got all weepy over — by starvation and the lack of medical care is, as Albright said, “worth it”.

So as not to be entirely negative, Mr. Trump, there is some praise flowing in for your attack. The NATO leaders who refuse to defend themselves, and want America to do so and pay for the privilege, have given you a collective thumps up. The Arab tyrants who oppress their peoples, and fund al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, think you are swell. And just look at the hurrahs coming from Israel’s leader, who graciously took time out from extorting U.S.taxpayer money from the congressmen and senators he has suborned to send his congratulations. Needless to say, the leaders of ISIS and al-Qaeda also have sent you their hearty thanks.

Finally, I hope you can revel in the widespread praise of those who are more loyal to Israel and endless war than they are to the United States, and who did all they could to elect Clinton, defame your family, and slander you. The praise of disloyal, Neocon, and interventionist U.S. citizens like John McCain, Bill Kristol and his Weekly Standard, Lindsey Graham, and Marco Rubio, whose speech on FOX this morning must have been written by AIPAC, emanate from men who hate your guts and will never stop seeking to destroy you. Their praise is not even worth what John Nance Garner once described as a “bucket of warm spit.”

You said, Mr. President, that you only wanted to be America’s president, and not the president of the world. Well the only way to be the former is to obey the constitution, and the only way to be the latter is evade it, so as to become the world’s self-funding policeman who gets the title of “Leader of the Free World”, which means you get to bleed the United States white by fighting other peoples’ wars. That title would be sought only by a Globalist, never by an American nationalist.

Your attack on Syria — like the attacks of all your post-1945 predecessors — evaded the constitution, and so damaged the republic by undermining the rule of law. The achievements that the attack achieved are, at best, paltry, Islamist-assisting, and unconscionably expensive. The applause you have won for attacking is both a plague sent by your and the republic’s enemies, and a nightmare for your supporters and advocates.

Surely you must remember the latter, Mr. Trump, they are the people who elected you because they believed you meant what you said about putting America First. Perhaps they were wrong.




Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

On the America First agenda, President Trump, the swamp is closing in on you

Mr. President:

With respect, Sir, you are letting the pro-status-quo swampers overtake you and position themselves to paralyze your plan to make the concept of America First the operative guideline for the national government. Except on the vital job-creation and morale-building fronts — on which you have done splendidly — the goal of America First seems to be fading from your administration in favor of business as usual both at home and abroad.  Please consider the following:

–Criticism of the Freedom Caucus: Your abrasive and unnecessary comments about these representatives may have been a function of your innate — and much needed in these times — propensity for combativeness. But now that you have had your say, just accept the fact that the Caucus saved your administration’s ass from a terrible bill put forward by the bulk of Republicans who want almost nothing that America needs. More fundamentally, if your advisers suggested that you attack the Caucus, it is time for new advisers. The members of the Caucus long ago demonstrated that they will only back-off when America is going to be assisted by the legislation upon which they are asked to concur. Criticism from you, denigration from other Republicans, or threats to work against their reelection in 2018 are not going to move them an inch. In a line of thought that flows directly from that of the republic’s Founders, the Freedom Caucus sees their task as legislating not only for the improvement of life and security for Americans today, but to ensure that all of our posterity inherits both a chance to prosper and a constitutionally viable republic. They will go down fighting for this goal not matter what pressures are brought to bear against them, and for that reason their worth to your and their effort to make America First a durable reality is inestimable. Wise up, Mr. President, as it is much more likely that the small Freedom Caucus will be re-elected in its entirety, than that you will be reelected in 2020 if you abandon their republican principles and concern for posterity, and side with the establishment Republicans. This reality, of course, assumes that there will be an election in 2020 and that the republic will not then be consumed in a civil war fought over the national government’s failure to prosecute the dozens of people who acted criminally under Bush and Obama, and whom the American people know could return to power and further restrict liberty, launch more interventionist wars, create minority rule, and impoverish them with new taxes. One way or another, Mr. President, those people must — and will — be neutralized, either by trial, conviction, and incarceration, or by rope and a very well-armed citizenry.

–Montenegro: What can possibly be found in this irrelevant-to-America, Balkan country, Mr. President, that would ever be worth a single U.S. dollar or the life of a single Marine or soldier? What is it that makes this country worth negating the Congress’s and, thereby, the citizenry’s sole constitutional prerogative to declare war? What is it that benefits the United States from an automatic war if a non-NATO country attacks Montenegro? Mr. President, this is the fine madness of  Senators McCain and Graham, both of whom are reprehensible political ghouls who love any war they can find so long as their children or loved ones are not at risk. Only the quickly growing-in-stature Senator Rand Paul had the courage to stand for America First when he blocked McCain’s late-night attempt to sneak Montenegro into NATO. Senator Paul needed and merited the support of you and your administration, as did the parents, wives, and children of our Marines and soldiers who would be killed or maimed in some half-assed, McCain-wanted war to defend Montenegro. Damn both you and your lieutenants for not joining Senator Paul to defend America First.

–Idiot Generals and Iran: Mr. President, with respect, you need to begin to think for yourself and go with your commonsense, and not with the advice of U.S. generals, a species that has proven itself unable to win a war since 1945, and who seem to live mostly to retire and become wealthy in the employ of arms makers, other industrialists, and foreign governments. This week we heard the Commander of the U.S. Central Command, Army General Joseph Votel, tell a congressional committee  that Iran is “the greatest long-term threat to stability” in the Middle East, and that, “We need to look at opportunities where we can disrupt through military means or other means their activities.” (1) Later in the week, FOX’s top-and-always-wrong retired general, Jack Keane, backed-up General Votel and said that, under the Trump administration, ‘We are finally going to hold Iran accountable.” (2) Mr. President, have you ever asked your genius generals — serving or retired — why, if Iran is such a terrible threat to the United States, they support the growing presence of U.S. military forces in Syria and Iraq that are nothing more than facilitators for the Iranian leaders’ campaign to establish Iran’s control from the Iran-Afghanistan border westward to the Mediterranean? Or, why they believe that the only entities capable of destroying the Iranian regime — the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, their allies, and the Gulf Arabs who fund them — should be defeated using the blood and limbs of U.S. soldiers and Marines in a campaign that will do nothing but ensure Iran’s hegemony? Get with the program, Mr. President, your generals are anything but America First; note their universal support for committing America to automatic war via NATO. You need to educate them to the fact that America First means as little war as possible, and no war ever to serve the interests of so-called friends –Saudi Arabia, other Arab Tyrants, NATO, and Israel — and known enemies, like Iran, Iraq, and Syria. There is, of course, no reason not to shoot to hell any Iranian naval ship or aircraft that is harassing or even nearing a U.S. Navy ship in the Persian Gulf. Otherwise, the course of wisdom is to just sit back and leave the slitting of Iran’s throat — and those of Syria and Hizballah — to those who are most eager and capable of doing so, the fiercely anti-Shia, Sunni mujahedin and their Arab-tyrant supporters.

–Israel First: It is beyond me, Mr. President, to know whether you understand that there is a direct correlation between the manner in which you manage the U.S.-Israel relationship and the number of U.S. Marines, soldiers, and civilians killed and maimed by the mujahedin. The more you side with, arm, and fund Israel, the more Americans you will get killed. This was true when bin Laden declared war on the United States in 1996 and it is true today. It also is true that you, as president, are the only U.S. official who can limit the damage done to the republic and its people by this relationship. Save for Senator Paul, it would not be surprising to find that the other 534 members of the U.S. Congress are in the pay of one or another of the major Jewish-American political organizations, all of which you should immediately force to register as agents of a foreign power. (NB: Russia’s purported tampering in the 2016 election is nothing compared to the decades of manipulation of U.S. presidential and congressional elections by disloyal, Israel-First, Jewish-American citizens.)  You will know, of course, that both Paul Ryan and Nancy Pelosi raced to the recent AIPAC conference to pledge their eternal allegiance to Israel’s interests, and this after they and their caucuses gave $38 billion of the money taken from U.S. taxpayers’ incomes to Israel. One might have thought, Mr. Trump, that that $38 billion would have helped pay for some of the infrastructure building, veterans’ care, and border-wall projects you promised. Would this amount not be helpful if spent in the interests of America First? So far, however, you have been nearly bellicose in your support for Israel, and you have sent there an ambassador whose loyalties lie entirely on the side of Israeli expansionism — and so war-causing — and therefore is a foe of U.S. interests and security. Whether or not Israel survives is of no relevance to the United States. It, like all other nations, has no right to exist and will continue to do so only on the basis of its own decisions and actions. The U.S. national government ought never to speak or act in a way that damages Israel’s absolute right to defend itself, but, more important, the national government ought to seek nothing but the kind of standard commercial and diplomatic relations with Israel that it seeks with all the other nation-states that are irrelevant to the republic’s survival, prosperity, and social cohesion.

The bottom line, Mr. President, is that there are no compromises possible with either the Republican or Democratic establishments because most of both are your enemies. Bipartisanship has long been dead because that process requires the existence of two distinct political parties, and today, on most issues, there is only one.

Your staggeringly difficult job, Sir, is to form and lead a strong and clear-sighted political entity that can be successful only if it neuters the Democrat-Republican monster, and then imposes upon its defeated, stinking carcass the will of the citizens who delivered the White House and their republic’s future into your hands. Time is short, Mr. President. While you dally with America’s enemies — most domestic, and mentioned above — and so strengthen the status quo, the party establishments, the mainstream media, and their super-rich allies are seeking to choke off your supporters’ access to the internet and social media, as well as their fair share of advertising revenue, both of which are nearly the only means that allow your message to reach your supporters. If they succeed in this effort, your own and the republic’s goose will be cooked. Time to get on the stick, Mr. Trump.




Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , | 6 Comments

Take note Mr. Trump, Speaker Ryan was brutally schooled by liberty’s requirements

It seems that Speaker Ryan and most of his fellow Republicans in the House have yet to understand what happened in the 2016 presidential election.

They seem not to have understood that Americans do not want to be told by the national government that they must buy government-approved insurance; that they must buy coverage for care that they do not need or want; that they are not stupid enough to believe that any policy with a $5,000-to-$8,000 deductible can possibly be regraded as insurance; that their premiums will only go up because insurance cannot be bought in states where it is cheapest (surely a violation of the interstate commerce clause); or that their national government has the right to confiscate their earnings and use the money to assure that illegal immigrants, unvetted refugees, and slackers receive healthcare better than their own and that provided for veterans.

They also seem to forget that, once again, the American people know that they are shackled to this whole socialist and meant-to-be bankrupting plan of nationalized healthcare only because of one unaccountable Supreme Court Chief Justice. (NB: This was not a banner week for Court. A 14-year-old girl in Maryland was raped in school lavatory by an illegal alien who was on the scene only because of a diktat by the Court’s unaccountable autocrats that said all of us must pay for non-citizen criminals to attend school so they can endanger young U.S. citizens.)

Enter the Freedom Caucus, God bless ’em. Implicitly asking Mr. Ryan and their colleagues why they are so damn dumb, most of the Caucus stood their ground and forced Ryan to withdraw his bill before it could be voted down. The Freedom Caucus has never demonstrated to greater effect that it truly knows what freedom, liberty, and the Constitution mean, and that the people who elected President Trump want him and his party to reclaim and then defend those things on their behalf. The simpering Mr. Ryan and his supporters, on the other hand, continue to regard the citizenry as dupes who will not recognize another bag of Obama-Care lawlessness simply because it is wrapped with a Republican ribbon.

Perhaps the most detestable words voiced by Mr. Ryan and his supporters were their references to “polls” that showed Americans really just wanted the “improvement” of Obama Care. These polls, of course, were taken by the same scoundrel organizations that constructed polls before the election based on over-sampling Democrats, and whose results showed that another criminal named Clinton would win in a walk. But again, Mr. Ryan and the so-called “moderate Republicans” — that is, those who want to enslave Americans and rob their wallets only “moderately” — demonstrated their deep faith in, and contempt for the stupidity of Americans by referring to the corrupt polls and the need they showed to create a healthcare system that can be approved by “all Americans.” Which is another way of saying that the national government knows what is best for all of us, and so the people will get what government wants to give them and not what they demanded — the root-and-branch repeal of Obama Care.

As for you, President Trump, you better be schooled by the old Irish-American proverb of my youth, “Ya gotta dance wit da guy dat brung ya.” And you were “brung” to the presidency by Americans who believe what the Freedom Caucus demanded, the utter annihilation of Obama Care, and its replacement by a non-socialist, non-bankrupting, non-enslaving, and minimalist healthcare system that lets Americans decide how, where, and if their money for healthcare should be spent.

Ryan and most of his Caucus, Mr. President, are no different than the Democrats. They talk smaller-government but never deliver; they talk lower taxes but — you watch and see — will not deliver; they talk less war but will always expand NATO and agitate for more military interventionism; they oppose abortion — another one-vote, Supreme Court sanction for murder — but do next to nothing to end it; and they champion the Bill of Rights but support unconstitutional “hate speech” laws, allowed Obama to trash the Constitution for eight years, and probably will vote to censor the internet. In short, Mr. President, you have fallen in with scum that is — with the exception of the Freedom Caucus — only slightly less malodorous and pestilential for liberty than the Democrats.

You certainly must know, Mr. President, that it is the ideas, values, and plans for domestic policy proclaimed by yourself and the Freedom Caucus that won you and the Republican Party the election. The success of Mr. Ryan’s bill would have told your supporters that Trump and his party are just more of the same charlatans, and that voters were wrong to believe that Trump meant to do what he said he would so. It is Ryan and the main Republican caucus that must begin to think, and then vote, on domestic issues, as the Freedom Caucus does, and not vice versa. All Republicans, after all, were elected because you advocated the domestic policies that have been consistently advanced by the Freedom Caucus and everyday Americans, both of which are blessed — unlike the Congress — with God’s greatest gifts, commonsense and a fierce love for liberty, family, and the republic.


Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Those who flout the republic’s laws, fan the flames of rebellion

“But while there are so many laws of our ancestors’ devising, and many that the deified [Emperor] Augustus enacted, the former have become ineffectual because they are forgotten, the latter (which is worse) because they have been flouted. This has only bolstered confidence in the life of luxury. For if you hanker after what is not yet forbidden, you may fear its being forbidden in the future. But if you have transgressed in a prohibited area and not been punished, there is no fear or shame after that.”  Tacitus, The Annals (1)

One of the themes that has been consistently focused on in this space has been the lawlessness of all parts of the national government. Now it seems that this rank lawlessness is accompanied by ignorance and/or contempt for the law and the Constitution. It is an amazing fact that this lawlessness, ignorance, and contempt are entrenched not only in elected politicians and senior Federal civil servants, but also in those who are entrusted with enforcing the law, the FBI, the Supreme Court, and Federal Judges.

Take the FBI. Under Director Comey — Tacitus might call him the “flouter-in-chief “– the FBI has proven itself to be the protective police for the American political elite. Now, each time he speaks, Comey’s words conjure those directed at a political opponent by perhaps the greatest non-interventionist of the early republic, Virginia’s John Randolph. “He is a man of splendid abilities,” Randolph said of his foe, “but utterly corrupt. He shines and stinks like rotten mackerel by moonlight.” (2)

It is, of course, old news, but Director Comey has established his legacy as the man who told all non-elite Americans that he will enforce the law against them, but not against their betters. A first-year prosecutor could have gotten an arrest warrant for Hillary Clinton with nothing more than three facts: (a) she set up an unclassified e-mail system to avoid the law requiring the retention of federal records; (b) she deliberately trafficked in classified information on that unclassified system and sent classified information to people who had no clearances; and (c) she lied to the Congress under oath on multiple occasions. Director Comey, however, must be too long out of law school to recall the fundamentals of his profession. Our, perhaps, he is happy to enforce the law against non-elite citizens, but is either fearful for his life if he takes on the elite, or he is being paid off by that entity. There does not seem to be a third possibility.

The Supreme Court has written its own well-deserved death warrant. During the ratification debate in 1787-1788, Hamilton, Jay, Madison, and other Federalists assured the citizenry that the anti-Federalists’ warnings that the Court would become a judicial tyranny, beyond the control of the people, were unfounded and indefensible. They even ridiculed their foes for fear-mongering.

But Hamilton and his centralizing colleagues were dead wrong, and the anti-Federalists were prescient republicans. The Federalists and especially the Anti-Federalists probably never imagined a citizenry so supine that it would allow — without undertaking armed rebellion — the republic to be ruled by nine unaccountable judges, many of whom, in the contemporary era, are often no more than berobed legal charlatans who twist the Constitution and the laws into shapes and meanings that are absurd and unsupportable by commonsense and human experience, let alone credible legal scholarship.

But that scenario is at hand. Witness Chief Justice Roberts’ argument and vote in support of Obama Care. Both would have earned him a failing grade in law school because Roberts’ seemed to know neither the law nor the Constitution. The first-year prosecutor mentioned above would have rendered a much more legally substantive and defensible decision. In a very real sense, all of the monetary costs, social divisiveness, wasted time, and political animosities in which the republic is now ensnared on the issue of healthcare are the direct responsibility of Chief Justice Roberts’ lawlessness and, apparently, his utter lack of commonsense and moral courage. Roberts’ is a most worthy successor to the civil war-fueling chief justice, Roger B. Taney.

Most recently, the national judiciary’s rife lawlessness has been seen in Federal judges blocking the implementation of President Trump’s attempt to protect Americans from at least a portion of the ongoing flow of violent Islamists — many under the guise of immigrants and refugees — into the United States. The clarity and constitutionality of the law under which Trump acted is irrefutable; indeed, his predecessors as president chose not to use the law fully and so knowingly exposed Americans to domestic attack. The judges who blocked this national-defense action knew that there is no valid legal basis for their actions, and so they have fled the legal arena for the more highly publicized field of self-made celebrity-hood and amateur mind-reading.

To please the bipartisan political elite they serve and protect, the judges found the non-existent in the Constitution. There is, for example, not a word in that document that provides a basis for believing that the 1st Amendment’s religion clause can be applied in any way to non-U.S. citizens residing in foreign countries. The Constitution was written by Americans for Americans, and any attempt to apply it as protection for overseas foreigners is either a form of madness, or a chauvinistic imperialism of a kind that could only be held by those who believe themselves superior beings fit to rule all of mankind. There was not a bit of this kind of totalitarian thinking in those who wrote the Constitution, but, sadly, it is today an all too common and debilitating mental malady among those power-hungry individuals who believe the synonym for judge is deity.

Not satisfied with finding something in the 1st Amendment that does not exist, and, with it, willingly endangering Americans, the two Federal judges also violated the legitimate and obvious protections for free speech contained in the 1st Amendment by basing their decision on what then-candidate Trump said during the presidential campaign. They, in essence, defend their unconstitutional action by (a) deciding that Mr. Trump is the only American who has no free-speech rights under the 1st Amendment and that he, and the republic, can be punished by the courts for his words; (b) believing that they can publicly abuse him for something he said, even though it has no legal bearing on what he does to legally execute constitutional immigration laws; and (c) claiming that they can read his mind — sort of law by tarot cards — and know without doubt that his supposed anti-Muslim beliefs, and not the obvious requirements of national defense, motivated his actions.

This is a judicial performance Mr. Orwell could have used in his book: judges using an unconstitutional attack on Trump’s free-speech rights to prevent the protection of Americans and their families. It would have been applauded by Stalin and Mao, and is being applauded by their ideological successors, Obama, Clinton, Soros, Sanders, Warren, and most of the media. That performance, however, cannot find legitimate justification anywhere in either the Constitution or the legal system founded thereon. It is simply another egregious example of the Federal judiciary’s lunacy-tinged and self-aggrandizing lawlessness.

Thomas Jefferson, as was his habit, swayed back and forth between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists. But on the reality of the Federal judiciary’s potential for tyranny, he was more often on side of the latter; that is, on the side whose dire warnings have proven accurate. “The great object of my fear is the federal judiciary,” Jefferson wrote in 1821. “That body, like gravity, ever acting, with noiseless foot, and unalarming advance, gaining ground step by step, and holding what it gains….” (3) Two years later, Jefferson laid out more fully his belief that the judiciary posed a clear threat of tyranny to the republic and so the end of republicanism. “At the establishment of our constitution,” Jefferson said,

“the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a free hold and irresponsibility in office, that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life, if secured against all liability to account.” (4)

Having decided to side always with the bipartisan political elite, and immunize it from criminal charges, it is increasingly apparent that the FBI, the Supreme Court, and the Federal judiciary are the enemies of the citizenry, and of the republicanism on which America was founded, and without which it cannot survive. Also clear is that they are eager to keep pressing attacks on each, blatantly, repeatedly, and with an air of smug, god-like superiority. They seem to be absolutely confident that they are bulletproof and noose-proof, and so are free to continue their deepening lawlessness and deliberate destruction of the Constitution without fear of reprisal. They are in for a brutal surprise.




–1.) Tacitus, The Annals. Oxford World Classics, (2008), p. 123

–2.) John Randolph, “Congressional Speech,”

–3.) Thomas Jefferson to Charles Hammon, 18 August 1821

–4.) Thomas Jefferson to Monsieur A. Corray, 31 October 1823


Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment