Skip to content

They’re desperate, really desperate

Alito’s flag shows the US supreme court is neither honorable nor functional any more
Moira Donegan
The upside-down flag at the justice’s house after the Capitol attack reveals how disgraceful our supreme court has become

The left, the progressives, the woike, the Blob, whatever you want to call it – they’re realising that they made a big, big, mistake. They took their eye off the appointment of judges.

No, not just the Supremes, the Federal judiciary as a whole – and the right started to colonise it.

Oh well, bad political strategy etc. But that has meant the Supremes ending up not being progressive, woke etc.

Which is where they’re getting desperate. At which point the wife of a judge, Alito, flew the US flag upside down. This is such a scandal that Alito must recuse himself, resign, commit hari kari, summat. As if women are not strong and independent these days but are mere accoutrements of their husbands.

Ho hum.

There’sactually a guy out there quite seriously proposing that Alito committed an ethics violation. Because some months after the Bud Light/Dylan Mulvaney thing started to happen he sold (perhaps $10k’s worth, that sort of number) his Bud stock and bought Coors instead. This shows that he’s ideologically inclined against trans, see? Inmstead of being a little late on what everyone could see, that the row wsa going to damage Bud sales and thus the stock value.

They really are desperate, desperate……

The flying of the pro-Trump, pro-coup flag is in clear violation of the ethics rules that apply to federal judges.

Sigh. As to this:

a controversy arose over why, precisely, those ethics rules have never extended to the supreme court justices.

Get a fucking clue Moira. The division of powers, separation of them, mean anything to you?

The justices did not elect, however, to make the new ethics code in any way enforceable for themselves. They’re not rules that can be enforced; they’re guidelines that can be – and are – ignored.

If someone else – anyone else – gets to enforce rules against the Supremes then the Supremes are not independent of those other powers.

JC onna pogo stick they’re desperate.

12 thoughts on “They’re desperate, really desperate”

  1. There’s an old headline thingy that sums it up: Supremes Rule Supremes Rule. The Supreme Court ruled that they were in fact the supreme court and that nobody could tell them what to do. Somebody needs to wallop this idiot with a copy of the constitution.

  2. @jgh Not gonna work. They know that but desperately want to change it.

    They are desperate, which means they’re currently very dangerous. Interesting times.

  3. If American judges are not as we thought unbiased individuals who make decisions irrelevant of their political beliefs, but activists pretending to be judges.
    (This must be true or no one would care who appoints them).

    Is it possible that the same is happening in other countries.

  4. Oh they’re really desperate.

    They’ve got generals and admirals in dresses, they’ve got the leading contender in the supposed opposition for the supposed election in court in four different places, they’ve added 35 trillion dollars to the national debt, they’ve got Antifa setting up tent cities under the approving eyes of the police in various cities, they’ve got 10 to 20 million illegal immigrants in the country, many of whom will vote in the aforementioned supposed elections, and more coming in daily, they’ve got all the major universities, they’ve got all the major newspapers and TV stations (arguably, though only arguably, apart from Fox), they’ve got Facebook and Instagram and all other social media with the partial exception of Twitter (they’re still banning and censoring on there, just a bit less), they’ve got the CIA, the FBI, and every other government department from the post office uk the CDC, they’ve got all the major corporations to one degree or another, they’ve just shown they are entirely willing and able to completely disregard the Constitution and suspend all its ‘guaranteed’ ‘rights’, they are busy arresting their political opponents (other than Trump) for non-crimes while ignoring vast and very clear crimes by their own side, they are pushing war in Europe, they’ve just shown how quickly they can turn a supposed hardline freedom advocating Republican speaker into a docile tool, and they have roughly half of the aforementioned Supreme Court, depending on the issue.

    Oh yes fuck me they’re desperate.

    In other news, Punch and Judy are real but luckily the policeman will be along shortly to arrest the guilty parties and on no account look behind the booth.

  5. @Interested And despite all that, they are desperate.
    It must be like pushing on a piece of string.

  6. One bit wrong with this analysis Tim – they didn’t lose sight of the importance of judges, we just got very lucky that R presidents have gotten to appoint most of the Supremes at the moment (and R senators held their ground after Ginzy died).

    But all over the country the Left is (and has been) fighting hard to capture State and Federal judgeships.

  7. ‘Is it possible that the same is happening in other countries.’

    Do look at some of the judgments of the Australian High Court, David.

    This is one of the reasons I think the stupidest reform that the UK has made lately is to create a Supreme Court. If a case manages to claw its way up the ladder so far as to reach the top it’s a political matter. And should be resolved by the top political organisation, Parliament.

  8. @Clovis

    They’re not desperate, that’s just performance theatre. They’re laughing at us.

    Though occasionally I do see hopeful signs – if hopeful is the right word – that the whole thing is more stupidity than planned, and that people are waking up, or perhaps – having woken up – are more prepared to speak out (because, contra Tim, all the desperation is on our side!).

    This by the excellent Die Fackel on the absurdity of Germany is one example (it’s an interview in Schwäbische Allgemeine with the Netfonds chief economist Folker Hellmeyer):

    The ignorance that is practised in Berlin is an expression of echo chambers from which critical minds are deliberately kept away. Red-green ideas have been carried through the institutions for decades, with a resulting shift in the axes of perception in the public sphere [that would include the notionally ‘conservative’-led Kohl and Merkel governments]. Today, conservative and liberal positions are sometimes portrayed as right-wing extremist. The suppression of other opinions and the lack of pluralism is the fundamental evil, because this ideologises politics, creates self-centredness and arrogance, and any pragmatism is lost [we all saw that during the WHO-declared, so-called ‘Pandemice™’]. And then the wrong decisions are automatically made [add: without any semblance of accountability].

    Can you give an example of this?

    Let’s take the Heating Act [orig. Heizungsgesetz]. It will cost citizens 1.5 trillion euros, or around 60% of Germany’s national debt, just to cut China’s CO2 emissions in a single day by 2030. That is utter madness.

  9. @Esteban

    But all over the country the Left is (and has been) fighting hard to capture State and Federal judgeships.

    Correct. This is why I’m afraid I have little time for Tim’s optimistic view that something magical like markets or the rule of law will save the west.

    This naive belief is like an anchor on the sinking ship because it stops us taking the increasingly drastic steps required to save a desperate situation.

    What would Ricardo say? is no longer an acceptable position.

    Some 400 Republican lawyers and politicians are currently the subject of spurious criminal cases brought by Soros-funded DAs in order to assist in the forthcoming theft of the supposed ‘election’, like they stole the last one, by having them disbarred or even jailed.

    ‘Amuse’ on Twitter:

  10. jgh: David Starkey mentioned that in a recent talk for the New Culture Forum, and it touches on David’s comment about judicial bias in other countries. The establishment of a “Supreme Court” in the UK is a direct assault on Parliamentary sovereignty. If the Court is Supreme, then by definition the sovereign power in this country for the last three centuries, the-King-in-Parliament, can’t be. And that’s a problem, because we have a say (a minuscule say as individuals, but a say) in that: although we didn’t elect them, the Law Lords were in Parliament with – a process, not a place – our representatives and the King. The Supreme Court sits in splendid isolation above all that.

    Which is superficially similar to the American system, but they have a written Constitution on which the Court adjudicates. That’s its purpose. The justices may or may not be biased in their judgements, but ultimately, in a sense, it’s not the President, Congress, or even the Court itself, but that document which is sovereign. Americans accept that, and venerate their Constitution. But we don’t have, or want, one. This is not a republic; it’s a kingdom, and we still expect Parliamentary sovereignty.

    This, of course, was also why we had to leave the European Union. Its courts claimed jurisdiction over our sovereign institutions. It’s important to note that this would be acceptable in the arbitration of foreign relations, and that was how they got away with it for so long: by eliding those with our internal affairs.

    All of which is a long-winded way of saying that the Blair government deliberately created a system whereby potentially politically-biased judges were placed above electoral politics. And now we’re about to elect a mob which thinks he left his revolution unfinished.

  11. Reading Interested & Sam D above, it seems pretty obvious you shouldn’t be looking for democratic remedies to your problems.
    Not saying you really ever had a democracy in the first place. But at least at one time they went through the motions & gave you the illusion. Now they’re not even bothering about that. They don’t think you’re worth the trouble.

  12. We’ve been keeping the plebs out of government ever since 1832 and the growth of the Party System. 75,000 people in a constituency can’t get to know their local candidates sufficiently well to form a judgement about them, so they have to rely on the public image of their party leader, and they vote locally on their opinion of the national party leader. So the parties decide who the candidates placed in front of the electors, and so chose who gets into Parliament. The British system is about keeping power in the hands of the Right People, and out of the hands of the Wrong People – politicians, councillors, ordinary people.

    It gets worse the lower down the government system you get. At district council level you have single party states where the control never changes, and hardly anybody ever stands to challenge an election. Lower down at parish level you often get fewer people standing for election than there are actual seats. I’ve known a few parishes with *zero* councillors!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *