Trump Got Slapped By The Supremes
The Supreme Court in two decisions in three days, has handed Donald Trump devastatingly embarrassing defeats and he’s having acute spastic bowel syndrome and it is far from cute.
First – SCOTUS in a 6-3 majority, ruled that LGBTQ status persons cannot be discriminated against in the workplace and in hiring. Trump appointee, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch added an additional layer of discomfort for Trump, by penning the majority opinion.
Gorsuch summed up the import of the ruling,
Today, we must decide whether an employer can fire someone simply for being homosexual or transgender. The answer is clear.
Then, two days later, the next shoe dropped. “Dreamers” – recipients of protected immigration and residency status under former president Barack Obama’s DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) initiative, were provided a reprieve from Trump’s arbitrary lifting in September 2017, of that status, which had the ruling gone against them, would have exposed them to immediate deportation proceedings.
And arbitrary it was defined by the 5-4 majority, which included Chief Justice John Roberts, who indeed wrote the majority opinion, arguing that the Trump administration’s decision to end the program was “arbitrary and capricious.”
One of the points of irony, is that Trump based his move to terminate DACA on a memo written by a man that he has savaged for over 2 years, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who, with little to no substance, argued in the memo that the program initiated by Obama in 2012, is “unconstitutional” – as is of course, everything the president and his ideological faction, find objectionable.
The practical implication of the ruling in favor of young men and women who were brought to this country as children and who did not violate immigration law as a volitional act or an act with intent, is that Congress can attempt to move forward with the Dream and Promise Act, but may postpone legislative action until Trump leaves office and the Senate possibly changes hands in January of next year as well. Joe Biden has pledged to sign the bill regularizing the status of Dreamers.
Trump’s reaction to these two bombs dropped on him by SCOTUS, was predictable based on the evidence we’ve witnessed that he is mentally coming apart at the seams.
The language used here is quite loaded, (no pun intended). It’s also intentionally impregnated with hysteria.
Most folks other than evangelical extremists and hyper racial immigration opponents, don’t see a Supreme Court decision as a “shotgun” blast to their face.
But the comment does reveal something – “conservatives” and “Republicans”, in the estimation of Trump and his following, are pearl clutching, racist ‘Karen’s’ who are profoundly in a state of horror at the arrival of a wider societal construct of Western Civilization.
At the least according to Trump, Republicans and conservatives are “proud” to discriminate against Americans who don’t practice their intimate activities in a manner they deem morally acceptable and also against adults who found themselves in this country in a less than by the book fashion.
Incidentally, even if you believe Dreamers should in some manner be held accountable for having entered the country illegally, let’s have some perspective on this. The offense is a misdemeanor, no more serious on the federal level than, perhaps, “disorderly conduct.”
by Richard Cameron
No good deed goes unpunished and some are punished twice.
Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman incurred the wrath of vengeful (impeached) president Trump, as have so many others, simply by testifying to the truth under oath in a House Impeachment Inquiry.
Vindman acknowledged to congressional investigators that he was listening in on the call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and that in his judgment, Trump was conditioning the release of security assistance to Ukraine on Zelenskyy’s assistance in uncovering political dirt on the man Trump assumed would be his opponent in the general election, former Vice President Joe Biden.
Now, Vindman’s name is on a select list of high ranking officers that have been designated by the Pentagon for a promotion in duty and rank and the Washington Post is reporting that Vindman’s promotion may be in jeopardy from a second act of retribution.
The first was when Trump, immediately after the GOP Senate voted to allow him to remain in office, fired Col. Vindman from his post at the White House and dismissed Vindman’s brother Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman as well, even though Vevgeny, assigned to the NSC, played no role in the impeachment controversy.
Trump, said of Vindman at the time of the firing, that Vindman, “was very insubordinate, reported contents of my ‘perfect’ calls incorrectly, & was given a horrendous report by his superior.” Needless to say, none of this was factual. The promotion list is on the slow track, despite denials from political hacks at the Pentagon.
Pentagon spokeswoman Lisa Lawrence in response to questions about the timeline of the list, said the department follows “applicable laws and regulations with regard to developing and reviewing officer promotion lists and submitting them to the White House and the Senate. This list and any names on it have been and will be treated as is customary.”
“For his lifetime of service and his commitment to the rule of law, Lt. Col. Vindman has been targeted by the President and his proxies in an effort to humiliate and intimidate,” Vindman’s attorney David Pressman, a partner at Jenner & Block, said in response to a query from the Washington Post.
Vindman has allies in Congress and Secretary of Defense, Mark Esper, may even stand in opposition to a Trump action to interfere in the promotion.
Vindman, since his ejection from the White House in February of this year, has been working on defense policy and planning at Fort Belvoir and will be moving to the Army War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania next year, according to his lawyer.
Although Trump called for the Pentagon to launch an investigation against Vindman, he was contradicted by a subsequent statement by Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy, who informed the media that no such probe or disciplinary actions were planned.
Trump has his hands full with pushback from active and retired leadership in the Armed Forces against his mishandling of his role as Commander in Chief. It will be interesting to see if he loads more on to his plate in the coming weeks and months leading up to the election.
by Richard Cameron
Trump signs on as unofficial promotional agent for new tell all book from John Bolton
Everyone paying attention knows the book from former National Security Advisor John Bolton, “The Room Where It Happened”, is set for release on the 23rd and we all know it will be devastating to Trump. So much, so that Trump’s handmaidens at the Justice Department have been directed to commence with legal action if it is shipped on that day. Actually a court hearing is scheduled for Friday, where the White House is seeking an emergency injunction.
Trump’s reaction to the book is encapsulated in the following statement:
I will consider every conversation with me, as President, highly classified. So that would mean that if he wrote a book and if the book gets out, he’s broken the law. And I would think that he would have criminal problems. I hope so.
Trump’s intent to put a padlock on “The Room Where It Happened”, is almost certain to be stillborn. A 2009 executive order outlines that certain materials shall not be classified if they:
(1) “conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error”;
(2) “prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency”;
(3) “restrain competition”; or
(4) “prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of the national security.”
Ben Wizner, director of the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, released a statement this week analogizing Trump’s intentions to a failed effort on the part of impeached president Richard Nixon:
Any attempt by the Trump administration to block the publication of John Bolton’s memoir is doomed to fail. A half-century ago the Supreme Court rejected a similar attempt by the Nixon administration to block the publication of the Pentagon Papers, and since then it has been firmly established that prior restraints on publication are unconstitutional and un-American. As usual, the government’s threats have nothing to do with safeguarding national security, and everything to do with avoiding scandal and embarrassment.
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher partner Theodore Boutrous, writing in the Washington Post, dubbed the Justice Department’s litigation against the book’s release as a “paper tiger, designed for a showy roar of outrage but with little prospect of any real bite.” Boutrous added that the lawsuit “is almost certain to fail to achieve Trump’s quest to block publication of the book.”
Boutrous continued that. “Instead, the complaint on its face demonstrates that this is just the latest example of Trump flouting the First Amendment and manipulating and abusing the national security apparatus for personal and political purposes to hide information of great public concern from the American people.”
What Trump utterly fails to understand, as he does on so many things, is that from a purely strategic standpoint, he could not possibly be following a more personally destructive course of action. Attempting to ban books from being published and distributed, is the best way to ensure that millions more people will be eager to purchase the book and anxiously devour the contents.
He’s the best promotional agent Simon and Schuster ever had.
by Richard Cameron
Matt Gaetz his tail in a crack, again
So this happened and why are we not surprised.
Yesterday in the House Judiciary Committee hearing regarding what steps should be taken on police reform, Rep Cedric Richmond and Rep Matt Gaetz got into a heated exchange.
Rep Richmond made the point that the other members of the committee, as sincere as they may be, cannot fully grasp the experience of a black man in America. Rep Gaetz flew off the handle at this and the video can bee seen in the link above.
Today, apparently in an effort to prove his worthiness to stand in the shoes of a black man, Gaetz announced, out of nowhere, that he has a 19 year old “son” from Cuba who he is quick to say is not a “blood” relative but that he has raised the boy for six years and the boy lives with him. Therefore, he knows exactly what it’s like to “raise non white kids” and claims he was “triggered” at the accusation he could not understand a black man’s experience in this country.
Needless to say laughter ensued. But several interesting things were soon discovered about Mr Gaetz’s relationship to his “son.”
In 2016 Gaetz posted a picture online of a teen boy and girl with him in the State House. He says in the post “It was great working with local students Sofia Burleson and Nestor Galban in Tallahassee this last week. They were fantastic House pages!” Nepotism or not his son?
A Christmas video Gaetz posted online shows Nestor seated on the sofa behind Gaetz who says “As you guys can see I’ve got my si..my helper, Nestor, here. I’m at my parents house..” Nestor looks up and waves at the camera. There is no date on the video.
Gaetz is so proud of his “son” he never mentions Nestor on any of his personal nor professional bios.
He does manage to mention his dog on one though. And while some are pushing back and saying “well it says family there too” he has numerous bios that do not mention any family at all.
In June of 2016, Gaetz is listed as a lawyer in a custody case involving Nestor Galban and a “petition for concurrent custody by extended family.”
These cases can only be brought if you have had physical custody of the child for a designated length of time. The woman involved in the case was a Maisbel Mendez who listed her address as that of Gaetz. A girlfriend? Employee? Or a false address?
And who, if Nestor’s mother died in 2012 as is being claimed is Marbelina Matos? (From August 2019)
Clearly Rep Gaetz did not adopt a young Cuban orphan 6 years ago. Also clearly he did not raise this young man as his “son” in any meaning of the title.
Did he become attached to the boy given in custody to a female friend or employee. Sure. Why not. I refer to my daughter’s friends as my kids all the time.
However I don’t claim to have raised them. I don’t keep them or my relationship to them a secret. And I certainly don’t propose that through them I lay claim to the experiences of their ethnic or racial groups.
That Mr Gaetz would use this young man as his “get out of racist jail free” card by announcing he is his “life” the day after his shameful display in Committee is why many people are saying #FreeNestor
by Jennifer K. Puebla