Thursday, December 13, 2018

Unindictable


Unindictable
That's what you are
Unindictable
Still true so far

Like the stench of skunk that clings to you
How the scent of you does things to me
Never before
Has someone been more...

Unindictable
In every way
And forever more
That's how you'll stay?

That's why, con man, it's incredible
That someone so unindictable
Thinks that family’s
Unindictable, too

[Interlude]

Unindictable
In every way
And forever more
That's how you'll stay?

That's why, con man, it's incredible
That someone so unindictable
Thinks that family’s
Unindictable, too

(c)2018 Marvin D. Jones.  All rights reserved. 

 
https://youtu.be/vDN5rG3wLa4

With apologies to Nat King Cole.

Monday, December 10, 2018

The American Appendix

MERE ASSERTION AND REPETITION DO NOT EQUAL TRUTH.  Sound decisions are based upon knowledge.

     America began as a backwater province of the British Empire.  But, after “a long train of abuses and usurpations,” the Colonies became “free and independent states.”  And then they struggled to make the transition from a monarchy to a republic.

     The Articles of Confederation were inadequate in war, and there was no improvement in peace.  The Constitution was written to address those shortcomings.  But, unbeknownst to some, the transition from the Articles to the Constitution continues.

     At the time of the Convention, there was no way to reduce “the different qualifications in the different States to one uniform rule.”  (James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 52)  It was an obstacle that affected options regarding a matter voted upon over thirty times.  How to choose the Executive was, said James Wilson, “the most difficult of all on which we have to decide.”  And the decision that was made created a misunderstood, misrepresented, and misused institution.

     The Electoral College has two functions.  They are popular choice and national security.  And there can be no doubt about the first.  For as Madison said at the Convention, the Executive “is now to be elected by the people.”  And as Alexander Hamilton later noted, “The President of the United States would be an officer elected by the people…”  (The Electoral College by Lucius Wilmerding, Jr., 3 & 19 and Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 69 respectively)  Nor is the second a mystery. 

     “Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal,intrigue, and corruption.  These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.  How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the Chief Magistracy of the Union?”  (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 68)

     “With all the infirmities incident to a popular election, corrected by the particular mode of conducting it, as directed under the present system, I think we may fairly calculate,” said James Madison in the House, “that the instances will be very rare in which an unworthy man will receive that mark of the public confidence which is required to designate the President of the United States.”

     “The original intention” is clear, as are the dangers when it is thwarted due to a hangover.

     “The right of equal suffrage among the States is another exceptional part of the Confederation….  Its operation contradicts that fundamental maxim of republican government, which requires that the sense of the majority should prevail….  It may happen that this majority of States is a small minority of the people of America; and two thirds of the people of America could not long be persuaded…to submit their interests to the management and disposal of one third.”  (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 22; emphasis added) 

     In 2000 and 2016, there was a political discontinuity—a misalignment of means and ends, a condition where a minority rules the majority.  Thus, the exceptional part of the Confederation contradicted that fundamental maxim of republican government, which requires that the sense of the majority should prevail.

     The problem that could not be resolved at the Convention has been removed.  Now there is a uniform standard because of the Fourteenth, Fifteenth, Nineteenth, and Twenty-sixth Amendments.  A seed led to conception and a long pregnancy to birth.

     The much maligned Electoral College is an idea whose time has come.  Dust off the 1787 DeLorean and the National Popular Vote* can jumpstart the flux capacitor.  Then the Electoral College can perform the two functions for which it was designed—popular choice and national security. 

     “One advantage of Electors is,” according to Madison, “although generally the mere mouths of their constituents, they may be intentionally left sometimes to their own judgment, guided by further information that may be acquired by them: and finally, what is of material importance, they will be able, when ascertaining, which may not be till a late hour, that the first choice of their constituents is utterly hopeless, to substitute in the electoral vote the name known to be their second choice.”  (LW, 180-181) 

     The focus on popular choice must not obscure the necessity of national security.  The Electoral College is the final check on fraud, an institution that can suppress “the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils...by raising a creature of their own to the Chief Magistracy of the Union.”

(c)2018 Marvin D. Jones.  All rights reserved.





    

    




































Monday, October 29, 2018

The Least Dangerous...During Good Behavior

Justice is the end of government. ~ James Madison

A circumstance which crowns the defects of the Confederation remains yet to be mentioned, the want of a judiciary power.  Laws are a dead letter without courts to expound and define their true meaning and operation....  To produce uniformity in these determinations, they ought to be submitted, in the last resort, to one SUPREME TRIBUNAL.  (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 22; emphasis added)

     I. The Appointments Clause

     The President "shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint...Judges of the Supreme Court...."  (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2)

     Alexander Hamilton addressed "the nature of the agency of the Senate in the business of appointments," which provides insight.

       It will be the office of the President to NOMINATE, and, with the advice and consent
       of the Senate, to APPOINT.  There will, of course, be no exertion of CHOICE on the
       part of the Senate.  They may defeat one choice of the Executive, and oblige him to
       make another; but they cannot themselves CHOOSE, they can only ratify or reject
       the choice of the President.  They might even entertain a preference to some other
       person, at the very moment they were assenting to the one proposed, because there
       might be no positive ground of opposition to him; and they could not be sure, if they
       withheld their assent, that the subsequent nomination would fall upon their own
       favorite, or upon any other person in their estimation more meritorious than the one
       rejected.  Thus it could hardly happen, that the majority of the Senate would feel
       any other complacency towards the object of an appointment than such as the
       appearances of merit might inspire, and the proofs of the want of it destroy.  (The
       Federalist Papers, No. 66; italics added)

II. The Proper Standard

     The nature of the institution has to be considered when an individual is nominated, and their interaction cannot be ignored, because it will affect the Court's image.

       Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that,
       in a  government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the
       nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the
       Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them.  The
       Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The
       Legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties
       and rights of every citizen are to be regulated.  The judiciary, on the contrary, has no
       influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of
       the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever.  It may truly be
       said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately
       depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments. 
       (The Federalist Papers, No. 78; CAPITAL emphasis his)

     Judicial review is vital to the health of the American Republic.

       The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited
       Constitution.  By a limited Constitution, I understand one which contains certain
       specified exceptions to the legislative authority; such, for instance, as that it shall pass
       no bills of attainder, no ex-post-facto laws, and the like.  Limitations of this kind can
       be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice,
       whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitu-
       tion void.  Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would
       amount to nothing.  (The Federalist Papers, No. 78; emphasis added)

     The job description is one thing, performance another.

       But it is easy to see, that it would require an uncommon portion of fortitude in the judges
       to do their duty as faithful guardians of the Constitution....  (The Federalist Papers, No.
       78)

     There are guidelines.

       To avoid an arbitrary discretion in the courts, it is indispensable that they should be
       bound down by strict rules and precedents, which serve to define and point out their
       duty in every particular case that comes before them; and it will readily be conceived
       from the variety of controversies which grow out of the folly and wickedness of
       mankind, that the records of those precedents must unavoidably swell to a very
       considerable bulk, and must demand long and laborious study to acquire a competent
       knowledge of them.  (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 78; emphasis
       added)

III. Service

     The tenure of those on the bench was not extended to make them barons.

       If, then, the courts of justice are to be considered as the bulwarks of a limited
       Constitution against legislative encroachments, this consideration will afford a
       strong argument for the permanent tenure of judicial offices, since nothing will
       contribute so much as this to that independent spirit in the judges which must be
       essential to the faithful performance of so arduous a duty.  (The Federalist Papers,
       No. 78)

     The intention was to strengthen inherent weakness.

       ...(F)rom the natural feebleness of the judiciary, it is in continual jeopardy of being
       overpowered, awed, or influenced by its co-ordinate branches; and that as nothing
       can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as permanency in office,
       this quality may therefore be justly regarded as an indispensable ingredient in its
       constitution, and, in a great measure, as the citadel of the public justice and the
       public security.  (The Federalist Papers, No. 78)

     Only a few would be equal to the task, and time was needed to take advantage of their talents.

       There is yet a further and a weightier reason for the permanency of the judicial offices,
       which is deducible from the nature of the qualifications they require.  It has been
       frequently remarked, with great propriety, that a voluminous code of laws is one of
       the inconveniences necessarily connected with the advantages of a free government.... 
       Hence it is, that there can be but few men in the society who will have sufficient
       skill in the laws to qualify them for the stations of judges.  And making the proper
       deductions for the ordinary depravity of human nature, the number must be still
       smaller of those who unite the requisite integrity with the requisite knowledge.
       These considerations apprise us, that the government can have no great option
       between fit character; and that a temporary duration in office, which would naturally
       discourage such characters from quitting a lucrative line of practice to accept a seat
       on the bench, would have a tendency to throw the administration of justice into hands
       less able, and less well qualified, to conduct it with utility and dignity.  (Alexander
       Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 78)

IV. Improper Liaisons

     Judges must avoid costume balls.

       It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three
       departments of power; that it can never attack with success either of the other two;
       and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks.
       It equally proves, that though individual oppression may now and then proceed from
       the courts of justice, the general liberty of the people can never be endangered from
       that quarter; I mean so long as the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the
       Legislature and the Executive.  For I agree, that "there is no liberty, if the power of
       judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers."  And it proves,
       in the last place, that as liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone, but
       would have every thing to fear from its union with either of the other departments; that
       as all the effects of such a union must ensue from a dependence of the former on the
       latter, notwithstanding a nominal and apparent separation....  (Alexander Hamilton,
       The Federalist Papers, No. 78; emphasis added)

 V. The Mask

     Imagination is an unnecessary ingredient to a scenario when history provides illumination.  For there is no mystery as to how a nominal and apparent separation comes to pass.

     "...(T)here is one basic check on a runaway Court: presidential elections," as Professor Bruce Ackerman pointed out in noting the significance of Bush v. Gore.  "The Supreme Court cannot be permitted to arrange for its own succession.  To allow (Bush the Younger) to serve as the Court's agent is a fundamental violation of the separation of powers....  The right-wing bloc on the Court should not be permitted to extend its control for a decade or more simply because it has put George W. Bush into the White House."  (Emphasis added)  But despite a fundamental violation of the separation of powers, Bush the Younger appointed John Roberts and Samuel Alito; and thus the Court packed itself.

     A nominal and apparent separation was made possible by a departure from "the original intention" of the Framers, of which self-styled "conservatives" are supposedly fond.  Yet the gentleman from Texas was placed in position by a detour.
  
     On July 25, 1787 at the Federal Convention, James Madison conducted a review of how the Executive could be chosen.

     "There are objections against every mode that has been, or perhaps can be proposed.  The election must be made either by some existing authority under the National or State Constitutions--or by some special authority derived from the people--or by the people themselves.  The two existing authorities under the National Constitution would be the legislative and judiciary.  The latter he presumed was out of the question."
  
     Nevertheless, Justice Scalia, a self-styled "conservative," first stopped the counting of ballots and then, with four of his like-minded brethren, ruled in favor of Bush on the basis of the equal protection clause in Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment.  But, in order to do so, they ignored Section 2.

     "...(W)hen the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President...is denied to any...citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except of participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of...citizens shall bear to the whole number of...citizens (eighteen) years of age in such State."  (Fourteenth Amendment, Section 2; the citation has been adjusted to reflect subsequent amendments that gave women the right to vote in all the States and that lowered the voting age to eighteen; emphasis added)

     Furthermore, the involvement of the judiciary "was out of the question" because the Constitution states that the House chooses the President in an inconclusive election.  The Senate does the same with respect to the Vice President.  (Twelfth Amendment)

     On February 13, 2016, a duly elected President was not permitted to make an appointment, when the opportunity arose, based on a remarkable statement--"The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice"--which was used to deny a hearing and a vote on the nomination of Merrick Garland.  But the self-styled "conservatives" again ran afoul of the Constitution, which they supposedly revere, when their actions are compared with those of the Framers in regard to "the nature of the agency of the Senate in the business of appointments."  For Alexander Hamilton contradicts the McConnell Rule:  "There will, of course, be no exertion of CHOICE  on the part of the Senate."  And Hamilton shows that what the Majority Leader did was an abuse of power:  "They might even entertain a preference to some other person, at the very moment they were assenting to the one proposed, because there might be no positive ground of opposition to him...."  (The Federalist Papers, No. 66; emphasis added)  Thus, the "one basic check on a runaway Court: presidential elections," which Professor Ackerman noted, was swept aside.
  
     Every time there has been a disparity between the popular vote and the Electoral College, it was because of extenuating circumstances, to be generous.  In four of the five cases, it was because of political shenanigans.  Such was the case in 1876, 1888, 2000, and 2016, with the Republican "winning" each time.  In 1824, there were four candidates, and the election was decided in the House.
But in 2016, political shenanigans were combined with the very thing the Framers feared. 

       One of the weak sides of republics, among their numerous advantages, is that they afford
       too easy an inlet to foreign corruption.  An hereditary monarch, though often disposed to
       sacrifice his subjects to his ambition, has so great a personal interest in the government
       and in the external glory of the nation, that it is not easy for a foreign power to give him
       an equivalent for what he would sacrifice by treachery to the state....
         In republics, persons elevated from the mass of the community, by the suffrages of their
       fellow-citizens, to stations of great pre-eminence and power, may find compensations for
       betraying their trust, which, to any but minds animated and guided by superior virtue, may
       appear to exceed the proportion of interest they have in the common stock, and to over-
       balance the obligations of duty.  Hence it is that history furnishes us with so many
       mortifying examples of the prevalency of foreign corruption in republican governments
       (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 22; emphasis added)

     In 2016, Operation Crosscheck, which has received little coverage, provided the perfect platform to piggyback the Russian Connection; and the gentleman from New York rode to victory, having "won" the Electoral College.  Then, because of the abuse of power by the Senate, he installed Neil Gorsuch, the Frozen Trucker Case Judge, on the Supreme Court.  Later, he installed Brett Kavanaugh.  Thus, two dubious elections allowed Bush the Younger and the gentleman from New York to install four Justices.

VI. "...in order to...establish justice..."

     At the time of the Convention, there was no way to reduce "the different qualifications in the different States to one uniform rule," which left a series of hurdles.  (James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 52)  But now, because of the Fourteenth, Fifteenth, Nineteenth, and Twenty-sixth Amendments, there is a national standard with consequences for States that deny or abridge the right to vote, and, therefore, at long last, "the original intention" of James Madison and Alexander Hamilton will come to pass with the President of the United States as the choice of the people.  The National Popular Vote can make it so, and, when that is done, the Electoral College can also perform its national security function. 

     "Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption.  These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.  How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the Chief Magistracy of the Union?"  (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 68)

     That warning has been validated by recent events, which reinforce the importance of precautionary measures.

     "With all the infirmities incident to a popular election, corrected by the particular mode of conducting it, as directed under the present system, I think we may fairly calculate," said James Madison in the House, "that the instances will be very rare in which an unworthy man will receive that mark of the public confidence which is required to designate the President of the United States."

     Like the one in the human body, the appendix in the body politic is an unnecessary organ--until needed.

     The union with the other branches has been disguised by a nominal and apparent separation made possible by the misrepresentation and misuse of a misunderstood institution.  Yet even if the Electoral College is used properly--to thwart political shenanigans that block the popular choice and to protect national security--more must be done to not just restore the legitimacy of the Court but to raise its stature.

     Hamilton addressed three basic requirements of the least dangerous branch.

     First, the importance of reason.

     "The judiciary...may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment...."

     Second, awareness of its role.

     "The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution....  Limitations...can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of the courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void....  But it is easy to see, that it would require an uncommon portion of fortitude in the judges to do their duty as faithful guardians of the Constitution...."

     Third, the exercise of restraint.

     "To avoid an arbitrary discretion in the courts, it is indispensable that they should be bound down by strict rules and precedents, which serve to define and point out their duty in every particular case that comes before them...."  (The Federalist Papers, No. 78)

VII. Crosscurrents

     History has provided enough experience to inform our contemporary conduct.  These are the essential elements that must be weighed--the institution, the individual, ideology, interaction, image, impact, and intersection.

     A nomination must pay respect to the basic requirements.  Thus, the current composition of the institution needs to be carefully considered:  Is the Court meeting those requirements?  And if not, what is necessary to do so?  After all, the Court is a collegial body that exists to "establish justice."  It is not a lifetime Cabinet with a Prime Minister in a robe, and, therefore, an individual who seeks truth--and is not a predictable vote--is invaluable.  For ideology is a leading cause of blindness.  But as an artist looks at a subject or object from various angles, so must the Court look at cases from different points of view.

     Interaction will affect the image of the institution and its ingredients.  An individual has to avoid a conflict of interest or even the appearance of impropriety while the institution, to be respected, must remember that Hamilton consistently referred to "courts of justice"--not a court of law that can be technically right and totally wrong.  The impact on American jurisprudence and American lives will be significant.

     The decision in Bush v. Gore has had a domino effect, and the pieces have fallen in place for those opposed to the Republic--District of Columbia v. Heller, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, and Shelby v. Holder.  In 2008, Heller dismissed Hamilton's definition of "a well-regulated Militia," which has a chain of command with duly appointed officers under a Governor or the President, and "it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security."  (The Federalist Papers, No. 29)  Yet Justice Scalia agreed to the assertion of an individual right to bear arms.  But guys running around with guns are no more entitled to call themselves a Militia than a citizen can claim to be a Federal agent.  In 2010, Citizens United equated money with speech.  In 2013, Shelby gutted the Voting Rights Act.  It was a torture trifecta--an insult to reason, an abandonment of the proper role, and a lack of restraint, which secured Hamilton's confession:  "...(T)hough individual oppression may now and then proceed from the courts of justice, the general liberty of the people can never be endangered from that quarter; I mean so long as the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the Legislature and the Executive."  (The Federalist Papers, No. 78)

     The intersection or union with the other branches undermines the constitutional design and endangers the freedom the separation of powers was meant to defend.  Instead, it creates a political discontinuity, a condition where a minority rules the majority.  And that will continue to be the case until the Electoral College is used to perform its proper functions--popular choice and national security.

     "The Judges, both of the Supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their offices during good behavior...."  (Article III, Section 1)  But those who fail to meet the basic requirements do not belong on the bench.  Their presence is an oxymoron, and the Constitution prescribes the remedy:  "The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."  (Article II, Section 4; emphasis added)

     Judges may comprise the least dangerous branch.  But they are cartographers who can do great damage.  For their knowledge of latitude and longitude will determine the accuracy of the maps used to chart a course that will decide whether the Republic sails with fair winds and following seas or crashes on the shoals.

     "Justice," as James Madison noted, "is the end of government.  It is the end of civil society.  It has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit."  (The Federalist Papers, No. 51)

    
    
    

    



   
   

   
      
          
            
     
    
     

Tuesday, August 28, 2018

The Electoral College Is A 1787 DeLorean

This is what makes time travel possible: the flux capacitor! ~ Dr. Emmet Brown*

     The abuse of history is a skill self-styled "conservatives" use to their advantage, and it has been on full display.  But the assertions repeated endlessly will not stand up to scrutiny.

     The great irony of the Electoral College is that it has been used for a purpose contrary to its creation.  But "the original intention" was clear.  After the Convention made the decision James Wilson called "the most difficult of all," James Madison said, "The President is now to be elected by the people."  (The Electoral College by Lucius Wilmerding, Jr. 3 & 19)  And Alexander Hamilton acknowledged the same during the battle for ratification.  "The President of the United States would be an officer elected by the people for FOUR years...."  (The Federalist Papers, No. 69)

     While there had to be a transition from the Articles to the Constitution, the principles upon which it was based cannot be misunderstood.

       The right of equal suffrage among the States is another exceptional part of the Confedera-
       tion....  Its operation contradicts that fundamental maxim of republican government, which
       requires that the sense of the majority should prevail.  Sophistry may reply that sovereigns
       are equal, and that a majority of the States will be a majority of confederated America.
       But this kind of logical legerdemain will never counteract the plain suggestions of justice
       and common sense.  It may happen that this majority of States is a small minority of the
       people of America; and two thirds of the people of America could not long be persuaded
       upon the credit of artificial distinctions and syllogistic subtleties to submit their interests
       to the management and disposal of one third.  (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers,
       No. 22; emphasis added)

     For the second time this millennium, the candidate who lost the popular vote supposedly "won."  In 2000, the margin was 540,000.  In 2016, it was 2.86 million.

     His Dubiousness was made possible by the sunshine patriots, the charter members of the Yap Patrol whose behavior has been so brazen as to be almost beyond belief.  But the night riders succeeded.  They wanted to dominate the stage; make assertions and repeat them endlessly; and create solutions to non-existent problems.  So, they got rid of the fairness doctrine during the Reagan Administration.  Thus, Fox "News" and "conservative talk radio" were born.  They could tell a story from a specific angle without fear of challenge from a citizen who would make a formal complaint to the Federal Communications Commission for an opportunity to respond.

     By simply claiming that there was massive "voter fraud"--and saying it over and over again--laws were passed to require Photo ID.  The purpose was to stop certain people from voting.  But the problem is the facts get in the way because Professor Justin Levitt's study of elections from the Presidency to dogcatcher, 2000-2014, revealed 31 POSSIBLE cases of in-person "voter fraud."  Thirty-one POSSIBLE cases of "voter fraud" out of one billion votes come down to 0.00000003 of 1%.  Ivory Soap is not that pure.  And that is why it pays to dominate the stage; one can ignore the inconvenient.

     At the time of the Convention, there was no way to reduce "the different qualifications in the different States to one uniform rule," which left a series of hurdles.  (James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 52)  But step by step--and with the passing of the baton--they were overcome, although some erected new barriers.

     The Russian Connection gets all the attention, but what also had an impact on the election was Operation Crosscheck.  And while that may sound like the authorization included plausible denial--"As always, should you or any member of the I.M. Force be caught or killed, the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of your actions"--it was a domestic effort to deny certain American citizens their right to vote.

     Kris Kobach, the Secretary of State of Kansas, was the commander.  His faulty list of approximately 7 million voters was used by GOP counterparts in 27 States to remove Democratic or Democratic-leaning voters from the rolls by claiming they were voting in multiple States.  A first and last name was enough for a match.  Jr. and Sr. did not matter, nor middle names, nor different Social Security numbers.

     "The program's method of identifying and purging voters especially threatens the registrations of minority voters who are...67% more likely than white voters to share America's most common names:  Jackson, Washington, Lee, Rodriguez and so on," according to Greg Palast.

     In the three crucial States that were supposed to be the Democratic firewall, the gentleman from New York "won" by 44,000 in Pennsylvania, 11,000 in Michigan, and 23,000 in Wisconsin.  Crosscheck removed up to 344,000 in the first and 449,000 in the second.  In the third, Photo ID, which is used to stop non-existent "voter fraud," made the difference by depressing turnout in Milwaukee.  Thus, the 20 electoral votes in Pennsylvania, 16 in Michigan, and 10 in Wisconsin went to the Republican instead of Mrs. Clinton.  And so, the legitimacy of the gentleman from New York goes beyond the question of foreign influence.

     The domestic covert operation against certain American citizens was successful because the self-styled "mainstream" press failed--and still fails--to cover this story.  But the falsehood about 3 million "illegal aliens" voting--circulated by the Kobach crowd--was covered.  Yet 7 million citizens on a list to deny them the right to vote are ignored.  And that takes us back to restoration of the fairness doctrine.  For if the broadcast press faced the possibility of formal complaints being made to the FCC, there would be pressure to respond to the concerns of communities adversely affected.

     Because of the Fourteenth, Fifteenth, Nineteenth, and Twenty-sixth Amendments, there is a national standard with consequences for those States that deny or abridge the right to vote; and, therefore, at long last, "the original intention" of James Madison and Alexander Hamilton will come to pass with the President of the United States as the choice of the people.  The National Popular Vote can make it so, and when that is done, the Electoral College can also perform its national security function, as noted by those two key Framers.

     "Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption.  These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.  How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the Chief Magistracy of the Union?"  (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 68)

     That warning has been validated by recent events, which reinforce the importance of precautionary measures.

     "With all the infirmities incident to a popular election, corrected by the particular mode of conducting it, as directed under the present system, I think we may fairly calculate," said James Madison in the House, "that the instances will be very rare in which an unworthy man will receive that mark of the public confidence which is required to designate the President of the United States." 

     Yawn Wayne, the man who would rather show off than show up, struts and frets his hour upon the stage.  The dime-store Macbeth is in denial about the dagger before our eyes.  But the tales told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing shall soon be heard no more.  For trust is the first quality of a leader, and it is violated at one's peril.

     "Responsibility is of two kinds--to censure and to punishment.  The first is the more important of the two, especially in an elective office.  Man, in public trust, will much oftener act in such a manner as to render him unworthy of being any longer trusted, than in such a manner as to make him obnoxious to legal punishment."  (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 70; emphasis added)

(c)2018 Marvin D. Jones.  All rights reserved.


1)  *Back to the Future

2)  https://www.nytimes.com/1987/08/05/arts/fcc-votes-down-fairness-doctrine-in-a-4-0-decision.html    [fairness doctrine]

3)  http://www.bradblog.com/?p=10746    [Justin Levitt study; 31 out of a billion votes]
       
4)  [Operation Crosscheck]

https://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/27009-voter-purges-alter-us-political-map    [11-17-2014]

https://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/43764-focus-greg-palast-how-can-we-stop-crosscheck-and-get-our-country-back    [05-25-2017]

https://www.thenation.com/article/the-crosscheck-voter-database-is-a-security-threat/    [02-02-2018]

5)  https://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/46437-focus-theres-more-to-the-narrative-about-hillary-clinton-and-wisconsin    [the self-styled "mainstream" press ignoring or discounting Photo ID voter suppression, 10-22-2017]

6)  [Operation Crosscheck ignored by the self-styled "mainstream" press]

https://www.salon.com/2017/01/10/the-massive-election-rigging-scandal-the-media-ignored_partner/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/19/us/politics/pennsylvania-democrats-trump.html

7)  https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/  [National Popular Vote]

And now, with Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III supporting Operation Crosscheck and Photo ID, it is time to consider the appropriate response:  "But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any...citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of...citizens shall bear to the whole number of...citizens (eighteen) years of age in such State."  (Fourteenth Amendment, Section 2; the citation has been adjusted to reflect subsequent amendments that gave women the right to vote in all the States and that lowered the voting age to eighteen; emphasis added)  So despite the gutting of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act in Shelby v. Holder, citizens can take action by relying on the Constitution itself.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/12/us/voting-rights-voter-id-suppression.html?hpw&rref=us&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=well-region&region=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well






    

Wednesday, August 22, 2018

Hellsinkin?

The wise shall inherit glory: but shame shall be the promotion of fools.  (Proverbs 3:35, KJV)


I. Then   

The Ambassador

Your highness, lately sending into France,
Did claim some certain dukedoms, in the right
Of your great predecessor, King Edward the Third.
In answer of which claim, the prince our master
Says that you savour too much of your youth....
He therefore sends you, meeter for your spirit,
This tun of treasure; and, in lieu of this,
Desires you let the dukedoms that you claim
Hear no more of you.  This the Dauphin speaks.  

The King

What treasure, uncle?

Exeter

Tennis-balls, my liege.

The King

We are glad the Dauphin is so pleasant with us;
His present and your pains we thank you for:
When we have march'd our rackets to these balls,
We will, in France, by God's grace, play a set
Shall strike his father's crown into the hazard....
And we understand him well,
How he comes o'er us with our wilder days,
Not measuring what use we made of them...
But tell the Dauphin I will keep my state,
Be like a king and show my sail of greatness
When I do rouse me in my throne of France:...
And tell the pleasant prince this mock of his
Hath turn'd his balls to gun-stones; and his soul
Shall stand sore charged for the wasteful vengeance
That shall fly with them: for many a thousand widows
Shall this his mock mock out of their dear husbands;
Mock mothers from their sons, mock castles down;
And some are yet ungotten and unborn
That shall have cause to curse the Dauphin's scorn...
So get you hence in peace; and tell the Dauphin
His jest will savour but of shallow wit,
When thousands weep more than did laugh at it.


II. Now
 
     Appeasement will do nicely.  Yet Neville Chamberlain only had Munich--"Peace in our time."  The asset has Singapore--"There is no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea"--and Helsinki.
 
     Unlike Winston Churchill, the gentleman from New York has nothing to offer but fraud, spoils, jeers, and threats.  And unlike the great Prime Minister, the American Judas shall only be remembered for collecting his thirty pieces of silver.
 
     On July 16, 2018, the asset met his handler after criticizing NATO.  Forty-nine years after Apollo 11 lifted off from Cape Kennedy, the gentleman from New York took off to kneel before Vladimir Putin.  From triumph--"Houston, Tranquility Base here, the Eagle has landed"--to surrender, at least by the Chief Traitor who put tariffs on the Allies and wants to take sanctions off Russia.
 
     Before the event, there was a present.  And the asset play'd with the soccer ball.  Recess won over the art of the deal.  No objection, unlike Henry V.
 
     "What treasure, uncle?"
 
     "Tennis balls, my liege."
 
     At the press conference, Jeff Mason of Reuters got right to the point with Putin.
 
     "Did you want (the gentleman from New York) to win the election, and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?"
 
     "Yes, I did.  Yes, I did." 
 
     It was as if Harold and Lloyd had appeared in Dumb and Dumber To and, while suffering from delusions of mediocrity, decided to go into another line of work. 
 
     Those kneepads the Comrade got him for Christmas sure came in handy in Helsinki.  A few days later, the gentleman from New York invited Putin to the White House.  Was it time to measure drapes for the Oval Office and take a victory lap?  But, Comrade, beware.  Any agreement you made or will make with him is worthless.
 
     "As to corruption," John Jay noted, in trying to imagine the unimaginable, "the case is not supposable....  The idea is too gross and too invidious to be entertained.  But in such a case, if it should ever happen, the treaty so obtained from us would, like all other fraudulent contracts, be null and void by the law of nations."  (The Federalist Papers, No. 64)
 
     The same applies to executive agreements, and the Case Act of 1972 requires notification of Congress.  So dispense with bad magic tricks.  Comrade, nothing up your sleeve does not mean something in our head disappears.
 
(c)2018 Marvin D. Jones.  All right reserved.


https://youtu.be/NHAAH8PCnMo    [Henry V]
 
https://youtu.be/nHHbBJENSy4    [the soccer ball]