Last week, the US House of Representatives voted to hold Attorney General Barr and Commerce Secretary Ross in criminal contempt over the census dispute. This week, the DOJ responded (as required by law):

“The Department of Justice’s long-standing position is that we will not prosecute an official for contempt of Congress for declining to provide information subject to a presidential assertion of executive privilege …. Across administrations of both parties, we have consistently adhered to the position that ‘the contempt of Congress statute was not intended to apply and could not constitutionally be applied to an Executive Branch official who asserts the President’s claim of executive privilege.'”

–  Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen

Advertisements

constitutionsm

I can’t think of a better way to celebrate Independence Day, and my 1000th post, than by reading our country’s “Charters of Freedom” – the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution and our Bill of Rights.  You can read all three here and even view photos of the source documents from the National Archives.

 

 

The Supreme Court of the United States must clarify that district judges can decide no more than the cases before them — and it’s imperative that we restore the historic tradition that district judges do not set policy for the whole nation.

– Vice President Pence

In this century, there has been an huge increase in the number of nationwide injunctions, in which federal trial judges bar the federal government from enforcing a law or carrying out a policy across the entire country. In this way, district courts have blocked current administration policy priorities on immigration, national security and health care.  The Trump administration has been issued 37 nationwide court injunctions in its first 3 years.  Attorney General Barr points out that only 27 nationwide injunctions were issued in ALL of the 20th Century.

The Trump administration is looking for specific injunctions to challenge through the Supreme Court, arguing that this practice endows the judiciary with legislative powers not allowed under the Constitution.

The unemployment rate among those with a high school education is 3.9 percent. The poorest quintile of Americans have seen their post-tax incomes increase 80 percent since 1979, according to Congressional Budget Office data, and post-tax and transfer income for that quintile has skyrocketed 32 percent since 2000. The upper-middle class in America constituted 13 percent of the population in 1979; as of 2014, it constituted 30 percent. According to Pew Research from 2015, when it comes to standard of living, “The U.S. stands head and shoulders above the rest of the world. More than half (56 percent) of Americans were high income by the global standard … and 2 percent were poor.” – Ben Shapiro, The Ungrateful Nation

The overall crime rate for 2018, meanwhile, is projected to fall by 2.9 percent compared to 2017. “If this estimate holds, this group of cities will experience the lowest crime rate this year since at least 1990,” – German Lopez, So far this year, crime and murder are trending down in America’s biggest cities

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.  – Read The Bill of Rights (Constitutional Amendments 1-10) courtesy National Center for Constitutional Studies

 

kava1

 

Brett Kavanaugh is not white privilege.  He is not toxic masculinity.  He is not misogyny.  He is not uncontrolled rage.  He is a human being.  He deserves to be judged on what he has done as a person.  This includes, by all accounts, being a good judge, a good citizen, a good father, and a good husband.

Judge Kavanaugh should not be judged for something he did not do.  All of the accusations he has faced are unsubstantiated and most are ridiculous.  It was right that the Senate (and FBI) considered Professor Ford’s accusations.  But her testimony is uncorroborated (by her own witnesses) and inconsistent (by her own words).  Neither the Senate nor the FBI has found any evidence in support of her claim.

The time for investigation is over.  Now the Senate must do its Constitutional duty and vote.  No more delays.  No more fraudulent claims.  No more dirty tricks.  Vote.  And vote on the man, not the political symbol.