Saturday, July 16, 2022

“Who’s To Be The Master Then?”

"You? Or the word?” That case had been decided 17 days earlier. There was nothing to “replicate.” Stare decisis applying, presumably, at least to this Court’s rulings.

So this guy makes Eastman seem sensible.
It is still possible that in response to this lawsuit that the U.S.Supreme Court will come to its senses and issue an Order that would disqualify the designation of electors selected by processes not authorized by state legislatures indeed, often in defiance of state law. I believe we have a duty to try every judicial mechanism available to obtain relief. However, even if it results in another loss in the Supreme Court, this suit would serve an important function in exposing to the diminishing number of Americans who still have faith in government, the true depth of corruption.
This is completely bonkers. This is not how the legal system works, nor how lawyers are ethically obligated to use it. Stare decisis is not challenged by getting any court to “come to its senses.” Indeed, it’s hard to believe someone was stupid enough to commit these thoughts to paper. It is somewhere beyond arrogance and bordering on madness. These steps would not restore faith in government, they would destroy it. The legal doctrine here is not even a well-founded one. It’s based on a bit of dicta from Bush v Gore that has never been examined in a case and for which there is no evidence supporting the contentions of this memo. This memo is spun entirely out of gossamer and wishes. It should honestly be Exhibit “A” for examining a lawyer’s fitness to give legal advice. This man shouldn’t be providing legal counsel in slip ‘n’ fall cases.

His argument is literally that, in order to save the government we have to destroy it. And why? Because of the corruption at the highest levels. What is the proof of this corruption? Trump lost. No, I’m not making this up.
If the Acting Attorney General were to refuse to file suit, and you were required to replace the AG to get it filed, it would create what the press would call a constitutional crisis, yet we are already in such s crisis brought on by corruption at the highest levels of government. We have suffered massive election fraud, and state and Federal courts avert their eyes. Election crimes have occurred, and the FBI and the Department of Justice see nothing. We have had a near collapse of the institutions of our government. Constitutionally, the President truly is the chief law enforcement of the United States not the Attorney General whose position is not mentioned in the Constitution. 
If the Supreme Court were then to refuse to act on this case, the deep corruption of that institution again would be laid bare for all to see confirming what the People learned when the Texas case was dismissed. Thus, filing the case is a win-win with the overwhelming number of Americans who just voted for you. As you said, all you have is the People and the votes.
With a nice dollop of  “whoever is not with us is against us” for good measure. If you presented this in a thriller, this is the point in the plot where it’s clear there is a conspiracy to commit sedition afoot. I honestly don’t know what else you could call it.*
Bonkers because they so glibly committed their conspiracy to paper.
He’s not wrong. Nor is he. This is a problem. So is this. Call it the John Yoo Effect.

*This, by the way, is the way you “delegitimize the Court.
For these reasons, the constitutional authority of the President of the United States to ensure that constitutional order is maintained, particularly when the federal judiciary has abdicated its role to decide controversies. At such time the President, armed with all of the executive power vested in the office of the presidency, has a duty to act decisively to preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. Constitution from threats, whether they be domestic, foreign, or both.
Still not a good idea.

No comments:

Post a Comment