September 22, 2020
By Mike Huckabee
DEMOCRATS WOULD PACK COURT REGARDLESS, GIVEN THE CHANCE
"Nine seems to be a good number. It’s been that way for a long time...I’ve heard that there are some people on the Democratic side who would like to increase the number of judges. I think that was a bad idea when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt tried to pack the Court.”
So said Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg in an NPR interview on July 24, 2019.
Democrats are now threatening to pack the Court with as many as four more justices; it seems they have no problem going against RBG on this, while using her name as a pretext for doing it.
As reported by NPR, she also dictated a statement to her granddaughter in her last days saying it was her “most fervent wish” that she “not be replaced until a new President is installed.” Ah, but this time, Democrats consider RBG’s wishes sacrosanct.
And they ignore something she’d previously said: “...the President is elected for four years, not three. So the powers that he has in year three continue into year four...and that’s how it should be.”
Never mind the confusion created by these very different versions of what she said she wanted, let alone the idea that someone’s deathbed wish should override the Constitution. And what did she mean by “new President”? “New,” as in “different”? Did she mean that if Trump is re-elected, we should hold her seat open till the “new” President takes office in 2025? That sure is a long time to struggle on with a tie-prone 8-member court. Just getting through the next few months that way would be a nightmare, given the inevitable election challenges.
Times sure have changed. As I said on Sean Hannity’s TV show Monday night, it was Sen. Harry Reid who “threw the match in the gas can” in 2013, when he killed the filibuster for judicial appointments. He was told at the time that it would come back to bite, and now it has. Thank God we have a President who won’t be intimidated and will do his duty, and I pray the Senate will do the same. I also wish we had some real journalism going on; then people would know that proceeding with nomination and confirmation of a new justice under these circumstances is constitutional and customary.
Andrew C. McCarthy, writing in NATIONAL REVIEW, makes the same point I did over the weekend --- that what happens now really all comes down to politics. One party will do what it calculates it has the power to do, given the anticipated political fallout.
As McCarthy points out, there was nothing wrong with President Obama nominating Merrick Garland for Supreme Court Justice, just as there was nothing wrong with Sen. Mitch McConnell’s Senate majority blocking that nomination. It’s all constitutional. The rest –- all the “outrage” –- is pure politics.
McCarthy worries, though, that Republicans’ push to confirm before the election may make it harder for Trump to win against enraged Democrats, as it motivates them even more. I don’t know about that. At the risk of sounding like Chandler Bing from FRIENDS, could Democrats BE more enraged? Republicans could smile and nod and confess to deep-seated racism and capitalist greed and cave to everything the left wanted, no matter how insane and unconstitutional, and they’d still move the goalposts and find more reasons to be enraged. It would never end. Republicans have the opportunity to make this appointment, it’s perfectly constitutional, and they must take advantage of it, just as the Democrats absolutely would. Case closed.
Sen. Lindsay Graham said on Hannity’s show that “we’re gonna move forward in the [Judiciary] committee, we’re gonna report the nomination out of the committee to the floor of the United States Senate, so we can vote before the election. That’s the constitutional process.”
Why so determined? “After Kavanaugh, everything changed with me,” he said. “They’re not gonna intimidate me, Mitch McConnell or anybody else...We’re gonna have a process that you’ll be proud of, a nominee who’s gonna be supported by every Republican in the Judiciary Committee, and WE’VE GOT THE VOTES TO CONFIRM THE JUDGE [emphasis mine] on the floor of the Senate before the election. And that’s what’s coming.”
Trump says he'll announce his choice on Friday or Saturday. Senators know it'll be Judge Amy Coney Barrett, who reportedly met with the President on Monday, or one of several other women on his shortlist (which he, unlike Biden, has revealed).
So this is apparently happening. Get ready to hear a lot more threats about packing the Court as “payback” for doing what the Senate absolutely has the constitutional right and, arguably, obligation to do.
REASON has a must-read (cautionary) article that outlines the various power-grabs the Democrats intend to make as soon as they are able. What everyone needs to understand is this: IF THEY GAIN POWER, THEY WILL DO THESE THINGS WHETHER TRUMP WAS ABLE TO GET HIS NOMINEE CONFIRMED OR NOT. For this reason, no matter what else happens, Biden and the Democrat ticket absolutely must not win. I cannot say this strongly enough. If they do, the America we love will be largely over. Republicans have to win in such a landslide that there’s nothing Democrats can do after November 3 to upset the process and the will of the electorate.
Author Josh Blackman agrees with Jeffrey Toobin in the NEW YORKER that these changes are not only good payback but “good policy as well.” He’s all for 1) the complete elimination of the filibuster, 2) statehood for DC and Puerto Rico, with two new senators for each (“an appropriate rejoinder”), 3) adding to the number of lower-court judges, and 4) adding to the number of SCOTUS justices (“the greatest and most appropriate form of retribution”).
"If Republicans succeed in stealing two seats,” he writes (note his choice of the word “stealing”), “the Scalia and Ginsburg vacancies, the Democrats could simply pass a law that creates two or three more seats on the Supreme Court. He likens this to playing a game of hardball.
See how the “game” is rationalized? (Again, they really don’t care what RBG would think of adding seats.) I brought up this article to get you into leftists’ heads and show you what they have planned. Clearly, they intend to do these things whether Trump gets his way on a new justice or not.
RETURN TO IMPEACHMENT?
I mentioned elsewhere that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was pressed on whether she would use impeachment to try to block President Trump from appointing a replacement for Justice Ginsburg. She replied that the Constitution requires that Congress “use every arrow in our quiver.” (Actually, it doesn’t. Also, her claim that Trump and his “henchmen” have threatened not to accept the results of the election applies much more accurately to her and her “henchpersons.”)
You can always tell that Pelosi is lying when she starts citing the Constitution, a piece of paper for which she has as much regard as a roll of Charmin. I guess she’s forgotten this bit of recent history, so let me remind her:
The House ALREADY impeached Trump on ridiculous, unconstitutional grounds. The Senate threw it out. Even if (God forbid) the Dems win the Senate, there’s no way they’re winning two-thirds of it, which would be required for removing Trump. And if (again, God forbid) Biden is elected, Trump would be gone anyway.
So the threat of impeachment is pure hot gas. It’s already proven so ineffective that Democrats were too embarrassed even to bring it up at their convention. As a weapon against Trump, it would be the equivalent of those people in movies who fire revolvers at Godzilla.
(Incidentally, did anyone else notice how Speaker Pelosi inexplicably wished “Good morning” to George Stephanopolous, 6-1/2 minutes into their interview? Joe Biden had better keep wearing that mask because whatever he has must be contagious. Yes, this is real.)
"IF IT WEREN'T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS" DEPT
While they rail about it being outrageous and unconstitutional to confirm a Supreme Court Justice in an election year, here are quotes from Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and other Democrats, insisting that we do just that in 2016.
Also from 2016: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said, “Eight is not a good number for a collegial body that sometimes disagrees,” and that it is the job of the Senate to vet a SCOTUS nominee, even in an election year. She said, “There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the President stops being President in his last year.”
Finally, it’s worth noting that they were all talking about Obama, who was a real lame duck with a Senate that the voters had given to the opposing party. The voters in 2018 expanded the GOP majority in the Senate and Trump is still in his first term and could easily be reelected, especially if the Democrats keep acting the way they are.
REAL LEADERSHIP ON IRAN
Monday, President Trump ratcheted up the pressure on Iran in a way that sets the stage for a confrontation later this week at the annual U.N. General Assembly. There are more details at the link.
In a nutshell, Trump declared that all UN sanctions on Iran that had been eased under Obama’s 2015 nuclear deal (which Trump rescinded) have now been restored. The Administration says the US has the right to do that because it was an original participant in the deal and a member of the Security Council. But other UN member states claim Trump doesn’t have the right to do that because he withdrew the US from the deal.
This is one of those situations where there are basically two options for the other UN member states: go along with Trump in sanctioning Iran…or bring in lawyers to spout legal jargon to “prove” they’re right and continue dealing with Iran, which means facing US sanctions on any nation that does that. Does anyone really want to swap being an ally and trading partner of the US for being an ally and trading partner with Iran?
I have a feeling this will be yet another situation in which the professional diplomat class mutters anonymous insults about Trump to the press, then does exactly what he wants. I also imagine he doesn’t care that they don’t love him, as long as they do what he thinks is right. You know, like real leaders do.
Monday, President Trump held one of his open-air “protest rallies” (he calls them that because according to Democrats, the coronavirus spreads at Trump rallies, but not protest rallies.) He spoke for slightly over an hour. Here’s a link to the entire speech.
The Secret Service arrested two people near the rally who were carrying a backpack with a gun and ammo in it. No details yet on what their intentions might have been, but here’s what we know at press time.
Whatever they intended, it’s a good reminder to anyone dumb enough to listen to AOC’s calls to become more “radicalized” that when you start threatening federal officials like the President and Senators, you don’t get put in pretend jail for an hour by a liberal DA who then releases you to go do it again. You get arrested by federal agents, hit with federal charges and sent to a federal prison, where sticking your middle finger in people’s faces and calling them filthy names is a very effective way to commit suicide.
Meanwhile, on the Democratic side on Monday, Joe Biden spoke at an aluminum plant in Wisconsin, where he once again attacked Trump’s handling of the coronavirus, declaring, “He panicked. The virus was too big for him.” (Actually, viruses are so small that it’s impossible to keep them from coming across the border, although one good way to slow it down was to stop travel from China, which Trump did and which Biden called hysterical and xenophobic.)
I guess he thinks Trump should have kept his cool and done pretty much nothing, the way Obama and Biden did about the H1N1 virus.
However, the most memorable thing said by Biden went largely unreported by the sycophantic media, but I think you should hear it. It’s his novel version of the Pledge of Allegiance. Here’s what he said:
“I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, one nation, indivisible, under God, for real.”
I think they should start the first debate off with that.
BIBLE VERSE OF THE DAY (KJV)