Author: Doug Santo

Geologist | Author | Photographer
Posted on

Headline of the day – Lefty perfidy edition

NPR suspends senior editor for telling the truth about NPR

“…This is your final warning. You will be fired…”

The only benefit of this is that NPR has exposed themselves as a far-left extreme group.

Posted on

This is nonsense. They don’t want the public to know the details because it would reflect badly on the current narrative…

Nashville Police Say ‘Ongoing Investigation’ Prevents Release Of Covenant Shooter’s Manifesto

Posted on

The Biden Administration’s politicized and unequal application of the law is shown to be frivolous and without basis…

Justice Gorsuch Throws Shade at Jamaal Bowman During J6 Hearing, and It’s Glorious

“…On Tuesday, oral arguments commenced in the case of Fischer vs. United States, scrutinizing the legitimacy of felony charges of obstructing an official proceeding against individuals involved in the January 6 United States Capitol riot. The court’s ruling will carry significant weight, as it could potentially influence the fate of hundreds of defendants from the January 6 riot and potentially undermine certain federal charges against Donald Trump.

Currently, the conservative wing of the court has expressed doubt regarding the government’s case, which U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar is making. Notably, Justice Neil Gorsuch posed a question that was epic, to put it mildly.

Specifically, he inquired whether Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), who infamously pulled a fire alarm to delay a House vote, could face charges under the same statute.

“What does that mean for the breadth of this statute?” Gorsuch asked. “Would a sit-in that disrupts a trial or access to a federal courthouse qualify? Would a heckler at today’s audience qualify, or a heckler at the State of the Union address? Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?”

“There are multiple elements of the statute that may not be satisfied by those hypotheticals,” insisted Prelogar. “It relates to the point I was going to make to the chief justice about the breadth of the statute. These built-in limitations are things that I think would potentially suggest that many of those things wouldn’t be something the government can charge as 1512(c)(2).”

She added, “It would include the fact that the actus reus does require obstruction, which we understand to be meaningful interference. That means if you have some minor disruption or delay or some minimal outburst—”

“So my outburst requires the court to reconvene after the proceeding has been brought back into line, or the pulling of the fire alarm, the vote has to be rescheduled, or the protest outside of the courthouse makes it inaccessible for a period of time,” Gorsuch interjected. “Are those all federal felonies subject to 20 years in prison?”

Of course, you can see where this is going. It’s not surprising that the Biden administration’s position was that pulling a fire alarm to delay a House vote wouldn’t be prosecuted under the same statute because it chose not to prosecute Bowman.

I love the way that Gorsuch used Bowman as an example, yet the conservative wing of the court continued to own Prelogar. Picking up with Gorsuch left off, Justice Samuel Alito gave more examples that Prelogar argued would be difficult for the government to prove obstruction of an official proceeding, insisting that “the term ‘obstruct’ on its face denotes a meaningful interference with the proceeding,” to which, Alito pointed out that 1512 (c)(2) “doesn’t refer just to obstruct, it says ‘obstructs, influences, or impedes.’ Impedes is something less than obstructs.”

No matter what example justices offered, including pro-Palestinian protesters blocking traffic on the Golden Gate Bridge on Monday, or the hypothetical of protesters blocking traffic from Virginia to Washington, D.C., the Biden administration’s position that none of these would meet the same requirement.

Curious, isn’t it?

I wonder what it was like for Prelogar to stand there as Gorsuch and Alito destroyed her case right before her eyes…”

Related:

Supreme Court skeptical of feds’ use of obstruction statute in Jan. 6 prosecutions

Posted on

NPR is a fringe organization picking fringe wackos as leaders…

Matt Taibbi: New York Times, NPR Bury the Lede in Defense of Katherine Maher

“…It’s true Maher was not working in journalism when she posted the controversial messages. In fact, she’s never worked in journalism, which is very obviously the bigger problem when examining someone’s fitness to run a public news network with over 1000 member stations…”

NPR’s queen of the Karens

“…It would be impossible to create a resume of a person more disconnected from Americans and more intertwined with the wealthy, urban, globalist elite who run the largest banks, media companies, and nonprofit groups in the United States. In other words, Maher has the perfect resume to run NPR.

And her tweets prove she is the perfect person for the job.

She’s a vegetarian. She hates cars. And white men flying on planes. She supports race-based reparations, rioting, and the Black Lives Matter movement. She believes “America is addicted to white supremacy.”

She doesn’t want to become a mother because “the planet is literally burning.” She uses phrases such as “CIS white mobility privilege” unironically. She admits to growing up “feeling superior … because I was from New England and my part of the country didn’t have slaves.” I wonder what fuels her sense of superiority now…”

NPR CEO Katherine Maher Says She Coordinated With Government To Censor Misinformation As CEO Of Wikipedia

NPR CEO Katherine Maher explaining that “the truth” is an outdated concept:

This crackpot goes on about America’s number one challenge:

Related:

Ms. Maher is a remarkable sample of Affluent White Female Liberalism (AWFL). She is so woke she is almost a parody of the breed:

Is this woman ( I assume she is a woman, but who knows) an appropriate choice for CEO at a public radio service receiving taxpayer dollars?

Posted on

I’m so old I can remember when all the smarties were saying don’t worry inflation is transitory…

Fed Chair Powell says there has been a ‘lack of further progress’ this year on inflation

Approaching 5% annual rate.

Posted on

Heh!

Posted on

Judge Merchan rules that the juror who joined a Biden election victory parade is NOT disqualified off the jury against Trump

Potential jurors heading to courthouse:

Image

Image

Posted on

Racist Joy Reid suggests that the criminal cases brought against Trump is racially-based vengeance by black officials

Posted on

No Questions About Supporting Biden to Jury Pool…

Trump Lawyer: Prosecution Seeks to ‘Stack the Deck Against’ Trump

Related:

Only 1 In 3 US Adults Think Trump Acted Illegally In Hush Money Case: Poll

Posted on

More government bullshit…

Posted on

What the Democrats are doing with illegal aliens…

Posted on

Modern journalism…

Posted on

She was probably introduced to and trained in her beliefs by the “professors” at the school…

USC cancels graduation speech by student valedictorian after they realize she supports Hamas

Posted on

Israel must finish the job…

20 hostages in exchange for six week truce

Israel must hunt down and kill or capture every Hamas fighter until none exist outside captivity. Israel must raze the Gaza areas where Hamas built military infrastructure until those areas resemble Caen when the British rolled through following the Battle of Normandy. Israel must convince the Palestinians that war is terrible and will not be beneficial to them.

Posted on

Chevron deference about to be overturned as unconstitutional?

Sayonara, Chevron

“…It’s time for the Supreme Court to jettison the doctrine known as Chevron deference, which forces federal courts to surrender their judicial function to the unaccountable bureau­crats of the administrative state.

This past January, the high court heard arguments in two cases—Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relent­less Inc. v. Commerce Department—that present the opportunity to do just that. A decision in these cases is expected by June.

Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution vests the “judicial Power of the United States” in “one supreme Court” and “such inferior Courts as the Con­gress may … establish.” As this language makes clear, the Supreme Court is the head of the judicial branch of our federal government. It sits atop the judiciary and super­intends the decision-making of lower courts through the opinions it hands down.

The Chevron line of cases is an exercise of the Supreme Court’s super­intending role over the judicial branch. It is a set of instructions to the lower courts about how they are to exercise their judicial function when review­ing agency actions that involve formal interpretations of a statute the agency is charged with admin­istering.

Under Chevron, the courts are told to defer to the agency’s inter­pre­tation if the part of the statute at issue has more than one plausible reading, even if the court believes there’s a better interpretation that’s more faithful to the statute Con­gress enacted.

Right away we notice something strange about this instruction: In its unanimous 1984 decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, the Supreme Court is telling the lower courts to abdicate a portion of their judicial power—to cede it to administrative agencies…”

Doug Santo